The Essence of Work Is a
Contribution to the Common
Good
YOUTH: All right. Well, suppose I have managed to attain self-acceptance. And that I have attained condence in others, too. What kind of changes would there be in me then?
PHILOSOPHER: First, one accepts one’s irreplaceable “this me” just as it is. That is self-acceptance. Then, one places unconditional condence in other people.
That is condence in others. You can accept yourself, and you can have condence in others. So what are other people to you now?
YOUTH: My comrades?
PHILOSOPHER: Exactly. In eect, placing condence in others is connected to seeing others as comrades. It is because they are one’s comrades that one can have condence in them. If they were not one’s comrades, one would not be able to reach the level of condence. And then, having other people as one’s comrades connects to nding refuge in the community one belongs to. So one can gain the sense of belonging, that “it’s okay to be here.”
YOUTH: In other words, you’re saying that to feel “it’s okay to be here,” one has to see others as comrades. And that to see others as comrades, one needs both self-acceptance and condence in others.
PHILOSOPHER: That’s right. You are grasping this more quickly now. To take it a step farther, one may say that people who think of others as enemies have not attained self-acceptance and do not have enough condence in others.
YOUTH: All right. It is true that people seek the sense of belonging, that “it’s okay to be here.” And to get that they need self-acceptance and condence in others. I have no objection to that. But I don’t know. Can one really gain a sense of belonging just by seeing others as comrades and having condence in them?
PHILOSOPHER: Of course, community feeling is not something that is attainable with just self-acceptance and condence in others. It is at this point that the third key concept—contribution to others—becomes necessary.
YOUTH: Contribution to others?
PHILOSOPHER: Is to act, in some way, on one’s comrades. To attempt to contribute. That is “contribution to others.”
YOUTH: So when you say “contribute,” you mean to show a spirit of self-sacrice and to be of service to those around you?
PHILOSOPHER: Contribution to others does not connote self-sacrice. Adler goes so far as to warn that those who sacrice their own lives for others are people who have conformed to society too much. And please do not forget: We are truly aware of our own worth only when we feel that our existence and behavior are benecial to the community, that is to say, when one feels “I am of use to someone.” Do you remember this? In other words, contribution to others, rather than being about getting rid of the “I” and being of service to someone, is actually something one does in order to be truly aware of the worth of the “I.”
YOUTH: Contributing to others is for oneself?
PHILOSOPHER: Yes. There is no need to sacrice the self.
YOUTH: Uh-oh, your argument is starting to crumble here, isn’t it? You’ve done a wonderful job of digging your own grave. In order to satisfy the “I,” one makes oneself of service to others. Isn’t that the very denition of hypocrisy? I said it before: Your entire argument is hypocritical. It’s a slippery argument. Look, I would rather believe in the villain who is honest about his desires than the good guy who tells a pack of lies.
PHILOSOPHER: Those are a lot of hasty conclusions. You do not understand community feeling yet.
YOUTH: Then I wish you would provide concrete examples of what you consider to be contribution to others.
PHILOSOPHER: The most easily understood contribution to others is probably work. To be in society and join the workforce. Or to do the work of taking care of one’s household. Labor is not a means of earning money. It is through labor that one makes contributions to others and commits to one’s community, and that one truly feels “I am of use to someone” and even comes to accept one’s existential worth.
YOUTH: You are saying that the essence of work is contribution to others?
PHILOSOPHER: Making money is a major factor too, of course. It is something akin to that Dostoevsky quote you happened upon: “Money is coined freedom.”
But there are people who have so much money that they could never use it all.
And many of these people are continually busy with their work. Why do they work? Are they driven by boundless greed? No. They work so they are able to contribute to others, and also to conrm their sense of belonging, their feeling that “it’s okay to be here.” Wealthy people who, on having amassed a great fortune, focus their energies on charitable activities, are doing so in order to attain a sense of their own worth and conrm for themselves that “it’s okay to be here.”
YOUTH: Hmm, I suppose that is one truth. But…
PHILOSOPHER: But what?
Self-acceptance: accepting one’s irreplaceable “this me” just as it is.
Condence in others: to place unconditional condence at the base of one’s interpersonal relations rather than seeding doubt. The young man found these two concepts suciently convincing. Contribution to others, however, was something he could not quite grasp. If that contribution is supposed to be “for other people,” then it would have to be one of bitter self- sacrifice. On the other hand, if that contribution is actually “for oneself,” then it’s the height of hypocrisy. This point has to be made utterly clear. In a resolute tone of voice, the young man continued.
