Work? and Ethics

Arnold Kling on the underpinnings of prosperous societies:

To achieve prosperity, a country must foster three "ethics."

• A work ethic.
• A public service ethic.
• A learning ethic.

These terms require unpacking, are subject to argument, and have nuances and downsides. But they further the conversation about what is good and generates the conditions for happiness.

The Work Ethic particularly interests us here in the Psychological Profiles wing of the Chez Dilys headquarters, where the Founder and Cook has a complex relationship to it.  All of us around here notice an endorphin rush when something worthwhile is accomplished (or is that just when it is "done," remembering a departed graphic artist who used to chant: Done is Beautiful!) So that "the work ethic" implies psycho-physical, endocrine and electrical, responses.

On the other hand, "the work ethic" can be interpreted as looking busy so long as anyone, anywhere, is working; not slacking, at its most extreme a communitarian suspicion of those who derive shortcuts to getting it done.  Or it can privilege the plodding or martyred and deplore leisure, ease, and joy.

So these are not simple concepts. But we're with Arnold. There are psycho-ethical components to prosperity, and that's worth testing by design, and tolerating outliers like some of us.

Econolog via Marginal Revolution. We particularly like Kling's "Wild Hypotheses," maybe it's true-maybe its' not-let's find out approach. Now that's a work ethic, a learning ethic, and a public service, raising the suspicion that he like all of us looks at the world through psychocentric, if functional, lenses.

Update: More here, especially in the comments, about a productively Inquiring Attitude into these things. Rafe Champion and his Revivalist look especially promising.