Does working hard make you a good person?

[Dissident Dan]

Does working hard make you a good person?

Does being lazy make you a bad person?

 

[cassiopeiae]

No and no. Being a good or bad person has nothing to do with working hard or laziness.

 

[Dissident Dan]

A better question is probably: Is being hard-working a moral virtue(assuming that your hard work is not going to an unethical cause)?

 

[THANOS]

I know a lot of hard working jerks out there. I am ver kind to others and I am lazy. So what makes you a good person is doing good things. It's not as hard as you think to be kind.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Dissident Dan
Does working hard make you a good person?

Does being lazy make you a bad person?

The answers to these questions vary, depending on the society, or set of philosophies, I would think.

In purely Biological terms, yes to both questions. If a member of a certain species is lazy, then they are a "bad" member (a better word being "weak" member), as they will not further the chance of survival and prosperity of the species.

However, in some societies, the lazy (and, usually, fat) members are the aristocracy, and working hard is a sign of being lower class.

 

[selfAdjoint]

What do you mean by "work"? what do you mean by "lazy".

To the hod carrier, the philosopher in his study is "lazy"; he isn't "working" with his muscles.

 

[Royce]

A long time ago I read a story about Benjamin Franklin who claimed that he was the laziest man in the world. That is why he invented so many things so that he didn't have to work so hard. I have no idea of whether it was true or not but it does illustrate a point. Looked at this way being lazy is better than being a hard worker.
My Dad used to say that people, especially me, would work harder at getting out of work or trying to make it easier than if they just went ahead and did it in the first place.
There is a Zen saying that if it is hard you are doing it wrong. With all this in mind and being a lazy person myself I have to say that hard work is the bane of the drinking class and that being lazy is the true mother of invention.

 

[Njorl]

I think it is obvious that working hard to do bad things is not good.

There is also the case of parents who work so hard they ignore their children. In the case of those who barely scrape by economically, there is room for debate, but for those who are well off, I'd say working too hard is a vice, not a virtue.

I think laziness is inherently a vice. I also don't think laziness is the opposite of working hard. Is someone in a coma lazy? No, but they sure are not working hard. Some people don't have the physical or emotional capacity to be human dynamos. It is nothing to be ashamed of.

Njorl

 

[Kerrie]

"working hard" and "being lazy" are both subjective perspectives...if you give specific examples of each, then a moral assessment could be given...

in general, i don't think either one makes you necessarily a bad or good person...however, if your actions help or hurt another then that moral assessment might be made...

 

[Zantra]

I'm fond of the saying "work smarter, not harder". Kerrie's right, this is all subjective. One man's hard work is another's enjoyment.
Good and bad are oranges and apples terms relative to industrious and lazy. They are two different sets of unrelated terms.

 

[Another God]

..yes...all subjective indeed...and therefore VALUE THEORY!

Hahahah...

 

[Iacchus32]

All we need do is consider the strong "work ethic" of the German and Japanese peoples prior to world War II. Combine that with a strong sense of national pride and what do you get?

The 4th commandment says, "Honor the Sabbath," perhaps for a good reason ...

 

[photon]

THANOS said that it is not as hard as you think to be kind.

Yes and no.
If you breathing does something good for someone else, you shouldn't be proud or rewarded. It would be better to work very hard and make a small difference for the better.

I won't say I'm doing the right thing because I pushed a button and ended world hunger.

 

[Unkaspam]

Originally posted by Iacchus32
All we need do is consider the strong "work ethic" of the German and Japanese peoples prior to world War II. Combine that with a strong sense of national pride and what do you get?

A couple of nukes dropped on 2 of your major cities and/or your nation divided up by 4 different nations.

 

[steersman]

According to Max Weber, the protestant ethic (and its concept of 'the calling') coupled with the spirit of capitalism made prtoestants wealthy in the 18th century.

They did however, refrain from indulging in their wealth. In this case, hard work was definitely perceived as a good thing because it honoured god. Moral asceticism demonstrated puritanical faith.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Originally posted by steersman
According to Max Weber, the protestant ethic (and its concept of 'the calling') coupled with the spirit of capitalism made prtoestants wealthy in the 18th century.

They did however, refrain from indulging in their wealth. In this case, hard work was definitely perceived as a good thing because it honoured god. Moral asceticism demonstrated puritanical faith.

And the resulting accumulation of wealth was taken as proof of being "saved".

 

[Death]

Yes... no... maybe so. It really depends on the person when you come to think about it. In some respects, yes, hard working people tend to be nice/good people because they know hard it is to earn money unlike lazy people who usually live off someone else earnings. And by working hard, you develop good values and morals (but of course that's not always ture).

 

[MacTech]

Originally posted by Dissident Dan
Does working hard make you a good person?

Does being lazy make you a bad person?

Well I think you have mix ideals together. If your definition of good/bad person is how hard they work then of course but you need to really ask what is a good person and what is a bad person not if the work they put into their life makes them good and bad...

Example: Hilter - worked very hard, times man of the year and probably the most influential person to the last 80 or so years. But killed millions, and that made him of course a bad person right, but worked damn hard at taking over most of Europe.

Also to the, what is a good person and what is a bad person you need to define what a lazy and a hard working person is. I mean lazy can be anything, I can stop right here or I can keep typing which I am just so that the number of typed characters goes up, of course some could say this is being lazy as well cause I am not checking my gammer of run on sentence structure and just filling space in this post however I worked harder adding to this post then if I would have just stopped up above.

 

[PsYcHo_FiSh]

Aside from the semantics involving the definition of good and bad people, I would say that not necessarily. Being lazy does not denote one being a bad person as well as being hard working does not necessarily denote one being good.

 

[expscv]

haha interest , it's good to have both lazy ppl and hard ppl, so we get a contrast and leanrns from it.

 

[Rader]

balance

"I work to live not live to work" If you spent the extra time saved, in the right way, maybe you would get saved. In that case working to hard would be futile.

 

[Loren Booda]

First determine the motive behind the hard work.

 

[Rader]

"7 capital sins"

First determine the motive behind the hard work.

You could try the "7 capital sins" for a starter.

 

[p-brane]

working hard
(a relative judgement relying on multiple points of view and an equal number of opinions)

good person
(a relative judgement relying on multiple points of view and an equal number of opinions)

Which begs the question:
What defines a good person and what defines hard work?

 

[motai]

Good people could work hard to earn a living via a job of some sort.

Likewise, bad people could also work hard to earn a living via crime.

Both good and bad people can be lazy (as all of us can be at times) if they are overly tired/stressed and haven't drunk their coffee.

 

[Thallium]

Does working hard make you a good person?

Does being lazy make you a bad person?

Both yes and no to both. I do believe there are too many philosophical minds here that want ONE answer, while there could be many answers depending on the situation and the circumstances. That's my comment.

 

[cragwolf]

From the subjective perspective of a master (employer): A hard working slave (employee) is better than a lazy one.

From the subjective perspective of a hedonist: Playing hard is working hard.

From the subjective perspective of Larry Wall (creator of the PERL scripting language): Laziness is a programmers greatest virtue.

From yet another subjective perspective: We work inorder to afford our laziness.

Brilliant!

I try to be an intellectual hedonist. I only fail to the extent that: 1) My brain is rather mediocre; and 2) My job eats up my time and energy. You see, I take play very seriously. I want to see a world where everyone works as little as possible so that they can play as much as possible. Unfortunately, we are not even heading in the right direction. Work hours continue to pile up, both parents work, and universities have almost completely mutated into job training centres. So it doesn't surprise me that the average quality of play in this world is rather poor. Instead of playing smart by learning algebraic geometry, or seeing how many globular clusters you can "rack up" with your small telescope, or spending a couple of weeks in the wilderness living only on what you carry on your back, most people play dumb by sitting on the couch watching the idiot box, or drinking themselves into a drunken stupor and wondering why they woke up in an alleyway with a broken nose, or going shopping for silly items they don't need just because that's what everyone else does. The work ethic needs to be replaced by a play ethic.

Any good thread about work needs to have a link to the following article by the iconoclastic Bob Black:

http://www.inspiracy.com/black/abolition/abolitionofwork.html

 

[PsYcHo_FiSh]

Work ethic doesn't necessarily make one good or evil. However, laziness can breed socio-economic conditions conducive to certain concepts of "evil". On the other hand, hard working people are admired for their virtue.

A society that has no work ethic is a society that is on the verge of collapse. That's just my opinion but laziness isn't as good as stout professionalism, in terms of productivity. Productivity = material success. Material success = less poverty. Less poverty = more opportunities. More opportunities = Easier life. Easier life = more opportunity for happiness. All of the above = potentially better and more productive society (which can lead to innovations such as engineering, math, physics, the internet, etc).

The opposite, of course, would have all the opposites of the above. One of the hall marks of such an opposite productive society is strife. Strife = bad for everyone's welfare and the stability of society.

We live in a material world and this discussion is very much rooted in the material. I think it is generally accepted common wisdom that, laziness is bad. It doesn't do anything for anybody but stagnate things. In terms of evolution, stagnation = extinction.

I think in this discussion, what should be remembered is that all things in excess can be very bad. On the other hand, all things in moderation can be good or at least can't hurt. Too much or too little can dictate which recipe for disaster one will have at a given time.