Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Argument Surveyed
Can we find deeper satisfaction in our jobs by embracing an ancient Greek concept, and, perhaps, doing some good old fashioned manual labor?
For anyone who is interested in the philosophy of work, Matthew Crawford‘s book “Shop Class as Soul Craft“ is a classic. Crawford is a former academic with a PhD from the University of Chicago, but SCASC is a trade book, published for a popular audience. Surprisingly, perhaps, given this fact, every major academic paper in the area of the philosophy of work that has been published in the past 10 years has cited Crawford‘s book and engaged with his arguments deeply.
Crawford‘s book covers a lot of territory, all of it deeply interesting. But here I want to give an overview of what I take to be his central, overarching, and most interesting argument. Responding to various trends in the economy and society, Crawford argues that we would do well to recapture a notion of work that is closely tied with Aristotle‘s concepts of craft or “techne.”
Techne is a Greek word that can literally mean “craft” or “skill.” Typically it refers to the skills associated with a particular craft, as determined by the context. For example, bridle making is a “techne,” characterized by the “techne” of being able to manipulate various metals and leather in an expert manner. And this Greek word serves as the root for many contemporary English words, like technical, technique, and technology.
And throughout the book, Crawford details his own work history. Narrating the story of his time in graduate school, his work before that, as an electrician, and his work after that, at a corporation whose primary purpose was to write technical abstracts for articles that were then collected in databases no one seems to make use of, after several years, exploring the academic job market, Crawford decided to return to his blue-collar routes, and opened a motorcycle shop, where he found his true calling, and what he would characterize as meaningful or purposeful work.
In his telling, motorcycle repair is a genuine craft. Unlike much of contemporary academic work, or knowledge work, Crawford argues that such work engages the human person in the way that work should. When repairing a faulty motor, there are objective standards one must meet. In learning how to do this well, one must rely on experts, and an entire community in order to learn how to do so. This work is satisfying, useful, and connects the worker with a broader community of practice in order to develop skills that benefit one’s self and one’s entire community.
In some ways, this argument can be seen as anti-technology, or anti-progress. Some have criticized Crawford’s vision as a call to return, nostalgically, to a vision of work that we superimpose on the past. Such critics argue that Crawford neglects the broader picture, the technological progress may fragment individual jobs, but has made possible such innovations, vaccines, cellular telephones, and all of the immeasurably powerful tools that computing and other forms of digital technology has made possible.
But when considered on the individual scale, from the first person point of view, Crawfords argument has something to offer virtually every contemporary worker. Finding a community of practice is something that even a knowledge worker in the most abstract industry can do. And developing technical skills is possible, even if one is a rocket scientist. We can embrace Crawford’s negative cases against, for example, the contemporary architecture, common in corporate offices, or the management, structure of many contemporary organizations, even as we recognize that his positive arguments need not entail that we all quit our 9-5s and start our own motorcycle repair shops, or bespoke candle-making local storefronts.
The book is impressively accessible, and I would highly recommend it, for anyone, interested in the philosophy of work, or who struggles to find meaning and purpose in their own day-to-day work life.
-pb
Deep(ish) Thoughts
A short explainer on why I think it’s important to define “work” philosophically. If you’re interested, leave a comment about my definition, and how you’d amend it.
(As always, if you like what you see here, feel free to subscribe to my channel here.)
Parting Rec:
Here’s a newsletter that I’d recommend: AutomatED: Teaching Better with Tech. The creators are friends and philosophers who think carefully about how to better incorporate cutting edge tech into the higher-ed classroom. I recently did an interview with these folks on my experience integrating tech into course design (among other things), which you can read here: https://automated.beehiiv.com/p/notre-dame-professor-bets-ai-good-humanities
Action items:
Get the book!