Veblen's Instinct of Workmanship pg. 25-35

By

Workmanship and the parental bent are considered by Veblen to be the two key “instincts” that further the material well-being of human beings. He states that they often work together and may be even hard to distinguish.  These can be interpreted as peoples inherent desire to do something and do things for the care and well-being of others.

 

Veblen has a great line when he takes on the notion of “race suicide”.  He says that the “phrase makers” (not in a good way, these are those people who are defining the conventional wisdom) try and make a thing of race suicide which thinking people disapprove of thoroughly . He also states that the parental bent means thinking of future generations well-being. Veblen was ahead of his time in our current discussion of long term sustainability.

 

I think he has a powerful statement on page that helps us understand the interplay of instincts when he writes that, “the instincts, all and several, though perhaps in varying degrees, are so intimately engaged in a play of give and take that the work of any one  has its consequences for all the rest, though presumably not all equally.” (Veblen, pg. 29, 1914). If we follow this thinking towards the bottom of page 29, he seems to be saying that the instinct of workmanship will in fact infuse all human activity such as law, art and religion. He writes that workmanship will in fact create a habit amongst judges and lawyers to follow “legal technicalities” with pride while allowing an injustice to flourish. It seems that perhaps workmanship is not always a positive thing (although I leave this point up to debate).

 

From there, Veblen talks about the fact that instincts are driven by some purpose or end in mind which varies quite a lot both amongst and even within an instinct. This makes it different from a simple human impulse or tropismatic function. Workmanship is specifically targeted towards “serviceability for the ends of life”. He then states that workmanship is a sort of proximate instinct that works in tandem with other instincts. He also defines workmanship as “efficient use of means at hand and adequate management of the resources available for the purposes of life”. (Veblen pg. 32, 1914).

 

Veblen gives several examples from here. A person engaged may wish to do violence or fight with someone else out of instinct. A trained fighter may use a workmanship like attitude to determine the best way to attack while someone will not. The same is true of charity where many will seek to help without really thinking through the best way to help in a workmanship like way.

 

Workmanship to Veblen will often fall in the background as other instincts are often stronger especially when immediate needs come to the forefront. He then says that workmanship is subject to bias. I take this to mean that workmanship can be put to ends that are very destructive to the individual and even community.  We can all become very efficient in the service of some very problematic ends.

 

Given this discussion, I can see how Clarence Ayres developed his Veblenian dichotomy of ceremony and technology. Although I think is a very narrow reading of Veblen, it is becoming more obvious how one can get there. for me, Veblen’s thinking is very nuanced and one should read slowly and carefully to get the whole message.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Veblens Instinct of Workmanship pg. 234-240

By
 This section starts with Veblen stating that in the handicraft era, the individual craftsman is again the dominant force in the economy.  This in turn implies three key facts that are important to Veblen.  The first key fact is that the instinct of workmanship is an important element in how humans think and act again. we can perhaps think here that the instinct of workmanship is less contaminated by other instincts in the handicraft era. Another key piece is that the "common stock of technological knowledge" is open to all and easily mastered by the individual crafts person. If we recall, Veblen wrote that this technological knowledge is always held in commons by all people but in certain eras it is dominated by a small group of individuals whereas in the handicraft era it is shared by many crafts people. The final key fact is that craft persons can easily understand technical and natural forces as they need to and machines are devised to be in accordance with the needs ...
Read more

Veblen's Instinct of Workmanship pg. 240-253

By
  This section continues Veblen's thinking regarding the evolution of the handicraft era.  The first point he wants to make is that the machine era requires a matter of fact and mechanical approach to work and workmanship as opposed to the era of human dexterity and high touch of the handicraft era. He also notes again how the crafts persons embody the nature of the economy in that era and convince many others that human craftsmanship is the best gauge upon which to assess society. He writs that,  “to serve the needs of this machine technology, therefore, the information which accumulates must in some measure be divested of its naive personal colouring by use and wont; and the degree in which this effect is had is a measure of the degree of availability of the resulting facts for the uses of the machine technology.” (Veblen, pg. 240, 1914). From this point, we observe the shift towards the machine age and perhaps of equal importance the price age.  As Veblen notes on...
Read more

Veblens Instinct of Workmanship pg. 231-234

By
 Chapter 11, the Era of Handicraft pg. 231-234 Veblen starts this chapter by noting that in his mind Eruope had not been characterized by large scale emperors but generally smaller fiefdoms and kingdoms unlike Asia for example. He felt that the Roman Empire was more of a southern European tradition.  Western and northern Europe developed with small scale industry and the handicraft system in the middle ages in particular.  This eventually changed over time as we have already explored as the technology changed and it became impractical for every small handicraft merchant to own capital. In the handicraft era, the habit was that price should be based on a labor theory of value but this changed to become based on freedom between buyer and seller as the capital intensive nature of industry changed. Over time, the owners became a smaller class of people and the workers, who were originally handicraft based, came under the dominion of the owners of capital.   This marked t...
Read more