| |
[38] Panacea: Re: social significance of abstract labour Hans' sentence “under capitalism, labour has social significance only as
abstract labour” I found quite interesting.
In many ways, social status has very little to do with the ‘time’
required to complete a task, but rather with the nature of the task
itself. We look upon the job of the architect as much more important than
that of the construction worker, although both may work eight hour days.
This is manifested in the pay each recieves. The abstract labour of the
architect has more value socially, and could be a basis for
stratification in a society. This is odd, especially when one recognizes
how much more physically demanding, and even in many cases more dangerous
the job of the construction worker is when compared to the architect. The
actual equality in time spent has nothing to do with the supposed
inequality of their respective abstract labour |
|