Work as a Calling: From Meaningful Work to Good Work, by Garrett W. Potts. New York: Routledge, 2022. 164 pp.

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q2 BUSINESS
Edward A. David
{"title":"Work as a Calling: From Meaningful Work to Good Work, by Garrett W. Potts. New York: Routledge, 2022. 164 pp.","authors":"Edward A. David","doi":"10.1017/beq.2023.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I n Work as a Calling, Garrett W. Potts suggests that our language about work— specifically our academic discourse around workplace callings—is problematically individualistic. It prioritizes personal fulfillment over the common good. It stresses subjective meaning making at the expense of moral traditions. Such language, Potts argues, has unwelcome consequences, including anxiety in constructing one’s meaning, depression from not experiencing fulfillment in it, and burnout from the related and never-ending pursuit of measurable gains. Obsessed with selfactualization, today’s language of calling limits and even harms our moral world. Potts’s diagnosis draws not fromWittgenstein (though a gesture toward language games would not hurt) but rather from Robert Bellah’sHabits of the Heart (1985), a seminal text in the sociology of American life. Potts’s antidote builds on Bellah’s constructive response—i.e., Bellah’s nonindividualist notion of calling—by adding philosophical heft from Alasdair MacIntyre, one of Bellah’s more notable interlocutors. Given this genealogy, Potts describes callings in a community-focused manner: they are not individualistically construed. Instead, they draw on “civic” and “biblical tradition[s]” (49) to advance “good work,” “the good of individual lives,” and “the common good of communities” (147). To understand callings in this way, Potts suggests, is to embrace the traditionand community-based languages of American life. This helps people transform intomorally exemplary practitioners and enables them to flourish “in their quest for the good life more broadly” (68, internal quotations removed). Those looking for a history of American individualism will not find it in Potts’s monograph. (In chapter 2, there ismention, but no discussion, ofMartin Luther, John","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"394 - 397"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Ethics Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2023.6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I n Work as a Calling, Garrett W. Potts suggests that our language about work— specifically our academic discourse around workplace callings—is problematically individualistic. It prioritizes personal fulfillment over the common good. It stresses subjective meaning making at the expense of moral traditions. Such language, Potts argues, has unwelcome consequences, including anxiety in constructing one’s meaning, depression from not experiencing fulfillment in it, and burnout from the related and never-ending pursuit of measurable gains. Obsessed with selfactualization, today’s language of calling limits and even harms our moral world. Potts’s diagnosis draws not fromWittgenstein (though a gesture toward language games would not hurt) but rather from Robert Bellah’sHabits of the Heart (1985), a seminal text in the sociology of American life. Potts’s antidote builds on Bellah’s constructive response—i.e., Bellah’s nonindividualist notion of calling—by adding philosophical heft from Alasdair MacIntyre, one of Bellah’s more notable interlocutors. Given this genealogy, Potts describes callings in a community-focused manner: they are not individualistically construed. Instead, they draw on “civic” and “biblical tradition[s]” (49) to advance “good work,” “the good of individual lives,” and “the common good of communities” (147). To understand callings in this way, Potts suggests, is to embrace the traditionand community-based languages of American life. This helps people transform intomorally exemplary practitioners and enables them to flourish “in their quest for the good life more broadly” (68, internal quotations removed). Those looking for a history of American individualism will not find it in Potts’s monograph. (In chapter 2, there ismention, but no discussion, ofMartin Luther, John
工作是一种召唤:从有意义的工作到好的工作,作者:加勒特·w·波茨纽约:劳特利奇出版社,2022。164页。
Garrett W.Potts在《我的工作是一种召唤》中指出,我们关于工作的语言——特别是我们围绕工作召唤的学术话语——是有问题的个人主义。它将个人成就置于共同利益之上。它强调以牺牲道德传统为代价的主观意义创造。波茨认为,这种语言会产生不受欢迎的后果,包括在构建一个人的意义时感到焦虑,因没有在其中体验到满足而感到沮丧,以及因相关且无休止地追求可衡量的收获而感到倦怠。痴迷于自我实现,今天的呼唤语言限制甚至伤害了我们的道德世界。波茨的诊断并不是来自维特根斯坦(尽管对语言游戏的姿态不会有伤害),而是来自罗伯特·贝拉赫的《心的习惯》(1985),这是美国生活社会学的一篇开创性文章。波茨的解药建立在贝拉的建设性回应之上,即贝拉的非个人主义呼叫概念,增加了贝拉更著名的对话者之一阿拉斯代尔·麦金太尔的哲学分量。鉴于这一谱系,波茨以一种以社区为中心的方式描述召唤:它们不是个人主义的解释。相反,他们利用“公民”和“圣经传统”(49)来促进“良好的工作”、“个人生活的利益”和“社区的共同利益”(147)。波茨建议,以这种方式理解来电,就是接受美国生活中的传统和社区语言。这有助于人们转变为道德模范的实践者,并使他们能够“在更广泛的追求美好生活的过程中”蓬勃发展(68,内部引文已删除)。那些寻找美国个人主义历史的人不会在波茨的专著中找到它。(在第二章中,有提及,但没有讨论,马丁·路德,约翰
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes theoretical and empirical research relevant to the ethics of business. Since 1991 this multidisciplinary journal has published articles and reviews on a broad range of topics, including the internal ethics of business organizations, the role of business organizations in larger social, political and cultural frameworks, and the ethical quality of market-based societies and market-based relationships. It recognizes that contributions to the better understanding of business ethics can come from any quarter and therefore publishes scholarship rooted in the humanities, social sciences, and professional fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信