This article was published in the John Deere Journal, 1974.

Social scientists say we work not just for money but for a whole range of other human needs and satisfactions.

Benjamin Franklin was a great lover of work. Pinching time as if it were pennies he labored long hours through most of his 84 years–earning besides wealth, such diverse titles as statesman and soap maker, printer and farmer, inventor and scientist. His zeal for work once caused a friend to remark: “The industry of that Franklin is superior to anything I ever saw. I see him still at work when I go home from the club and he is at work again before his neighbors are out of bed.”

Although such an all-out dedication to work is rare today, most people in the modern world still seem to be guided by a strong work ethic. More than 90 percent of all men in the US between ages 20 and 54 are either employed or actively seeking work. The proportion of married women who work outside their homes has risen from 25 to 42 percent in the past 20 years.

And despite signs to the contrary, young people still have a strong commitment to work. A 1971 survey of college students conducted by Daniel Yankelovich incorporated found that 79 percent believe commitment to a career is essential, and only 30% would welcome less emphasis on hard work in the U.S.

Indeed, whoever invented work probably never figured man would take to it as well as he has. It is surprising–considering the burden and routine and responsibility of work–that humans, in general, seem to cheerfully accept, if not enjoy, their role as workers.

Human beings have not always toiled so happily, however. The ancient Greeks detested work and relied on slaves to get things done. Aristotle decried: “All paid employments absorb and degrade the mind.” The Hebrew saw work as punishment. The first Christians did work as a pendant.

Perhaps St. Benedict should be credited (or blamed) for kindling the work ethic. In the sixth century he posted this rule for his monks: “Idleness is the enemy of the soul. And therefore, at fixed times, the brothers ought to be occupied in manual labor, and, again at fixed times, in sacred reading.”

Why is man the only animal that is a worker? Many people will admit to working for nothing more than money and the things money will buy: food, clothing, shelter, “The Good Life.”
“We go to work to get the dough to get the food to get the strength to go to work to get the dough to get the food to get…” is their endless chant.

But great thinkers who have labored over the question are sure there’s much more to work than that. Frederick Froebel , the man who invented kindergarten, said: “The delusive idea that men toil and work for the sake of preserving their bodies and curing for themselves bread, houses, clothes, is degrading and not to be encouraged.”

Today’s social scientists say we now work not just for money (although few would downplay its importance) but for a whole range of other human needs and satisfactions. Elliott Jacques, an industrial social consultant, says: “Work does not satisfy man’s material needs alone. In a very deep sense, it gives him a measure of his sanity.”

And the authors of work in America, a 1972 report to the Secretary of Health, Education, And Welfare conclude: “To be denied work is to be denied far more than the things that paid work buys; it is to be denied the ability to define and respect oneself.” The study does stipulate that, to be beneficial, the work must be meaningful and dignified.

So far there’s no sign that employees are about to begin paying their employers for the mental satisfaction of working. However, there is enough evidence around to support the idea that work, defined as engaging in activities that produce things valued by other people, is a necessity for most people.

For instance, when twwo University of Michigan researchers asked a sample of men if they would continue to work even if they inherited enough money to live comfortably without it, 80 percent answered yes, even though only 9 percent said they would continue because they liked their present job. Another study by the Survey Research Center at the University of Michigan showed that as people increased their wealth and income, they did not tend to decrease their time and energy spent on work.

There is also substantial evidence that work holds the same meaning for the poor and unemployed as it does for the middle class and unemployed. A study by the Labor Department found that the poor of both races and sexes identified their self esteem with work to the same extent as non-poor persons do. So strong is the need to work that some observers even say a desire to obtain the non-monetary satisfactions of work is at the heart of the women’s liberation movement.

What, besides the livelihood, does work offer? First, an identity. It is by no accident that –when someone meets someone for the first time—“How do you do? is usually closely followed by “What do you do?” Since most working people describe themselves by the company or organization to which they belong, work makes them “somebody.” Unemployed people become “nobodies.”

The importance of this job-related identification shows up when a person retires. Scientists attribute much of the trauma associated with retirement to a sudden loss of identity.

Work also provides us a good place to continually test and evaluate ourselves, to measure our achievements, to build self esteem. “I don’t like work– no man does,” said the English novelist Joseph Conrad. “But I like what is in work– the chance to find yourself, your own reality–for yourself, not for others –what no other man can ever know.”

Through work we gain a sense of competence and value. A job tells the worker that he is needed, that he has something to offer. Too often, however, how we do at work is taken as a measure of how valuable we are as human beings. “To make it in a job is to make it as a person,” Eric Fromm, psychoanalyst, explains: “Since modern man experiences himself both as the seller and the commodity to be sold on the market, his self esteem depends on conditions beyond his control. If he is successful he is valuable; if he is not, he is worthless.”

Work also plays a major role in determining the status of the worker and his family. What the breadwinner does determines what he earns, and therefore where he is on the social ladder, where he and his family live, who their friends are. It can even affect their opportunities in life. There are some who say that as more women enter the workforce, social standing may be eventually determined by wives as well as husbands.

But even if work failed to provide identity, self esteem, or status, it would still fill another human need: that of bringing order to our lives. For many people work is simply the best way of filling up a lot of time. As hectic as some jobs are, they still seem orderly compared to life after hours. “It takes a highly intellectual individual to enjoy leisure. Most of us had better count on working,” a philosopher once mused.

Many studies reveal the effects of prolonged unemployment. During the depression of the 1930s, the unemployed and their families showed signs of chronic disorganization, loss of self-confidence, a sense of helplessness and isolation. These same symptoms are sometimes exhibited among present day ghetto dwellers.

“Today, the American without a job is a misfit,” writes Sebastian de Grazia in his book Of Time, Work, and Leisure. “To hold a job means to have status, to belong in the way of life.” Various studies have portrayed the unemployed man as confused, panicky, prone to suicide, mayhem, and revolt. Totalitarian regimes seem to know what unemployment can mean; they never permit it.

So as disgruntled as it may seem, it looks as if most human beings are banished to a life of work. Given that, maybe we should all adopt the resigned attitude of Rudyard Kipling: “But till we are built like angels–with hammer and chisel and pen, we will work for ourself and a woman, forever and ever, Amen.”