A Middle Way for Work

 This is the time when we should start to redefine what work means for us. Obviously, technology is starting the talk with AI and machines. In fact, its technology itself what brings the question. Sometimes things tend to be reduced to the over repeated “machines will take our jobs!” and there’s this thing about living a purposeless life because UBI and human obsolescence. Having a job doesn’t automatically give people a purpose. This is more evident now in this individualistic society. For some is just paying bills and affording streaming services. Yeah, some workers think about their families, their country, or even humanity, but that only shows it’s all about human connection not just the working. A jobless society is not necessarily a work-less society. People who feel the impulse to do things are called “ambitious”, and people who doesn’t know what to do with their lives are pointed at as “lazy”; both of them would exist in a AI/UBI sponsored jobless society.

There are jobs that I would call inhuman, not because they’re cruel—some of them are, though—but because they should not be done by humans anymore; it’s pointless, it’s stupid. The reasons they still exist are human labor being cheaper, the idea that humans must do it, and the fear of humans becoming redundant. There’s a distinction that is usually neglected: jobs related to object tasks, and jobs related to human tasks. Sorting stuff in a warehouse: object task. A hairdresser: human task. Things get a little confusing in medicine. Should a robot operate? What about people not stopping using AI as therapists? And this is when things are thought in extremes. It wouldn’t be an all robots working and people not doing shit world. The operation, some people taking care of the patient while the “robo-doc” does its job (let’s not get into the pronouns discussion here, its already a mess with humans). I let myself dream about nanobots taking care of everything in some future ahead of that. The therapist, wouldn’t you prefer to talk to a human therapist if it was just affordable? But I see a complication here, or not a complication but a peculiar situation: in that society, the human therapist may opt to volunteer or keep charging; her or his services would keep being expensive, as some people would want to give more of their UBI to get them. Well, at least you can talk to a more sophisticated AI.

The problem with a universal solution for humankind is the tendency to totalitarianism. You start to think things like “with all that food in the world, we can assign a minimal portion to everyone”, and then “no one could have more”, and then “those obese motherfuckers who wants two pieces of cake will be persecuted!”. I wonder if at some point, in order to keep UBI being useful, some measures are taken to prevent a monopoly in human services.

Anyway, it would be nice if it wasn’t necessary for you to take an inhuman job to survive. Also, the disparities in income and prestige for other kind of inhuman jobs (accounting, surgery, managers...) would be leveled… oh, I see. But hey, musicians would be singing for us, not recording stuff and selling it. Hopefully, we’d found job substitutes called “activities” which we would do in active communities fueled by exploration of interests. Or we could keep doing our stuff, but just because we want to do so. We would live more for other people, and that would gives us purpose (I’ve been googling about Viktor Frankl and Logotherapy).