Should you “Do What You Love?”

Well sure, I guess. In the past few days I have encountered four separate articles concerning the question of whether one should (only) do the work they love.

In “A Life Beyond Do What You Love,” philosophy professor Gordon Marino argues that doing what we don’t want to do–doing our duty—is more noble and ethical than just doing what we love. He doesn’t take kindly to the physician who quit his practice to skateboard all day. In, “In the Name of Love,”  the historian Miya Tokumitsu says that the “do what you love” ethos is elitist and degrades work not done from personal passion. It neglects that work may develop our talents, be part of our duty, or be necessary for our survival. The socio-economic elite advance such a view, forgetting their lives depend upon so-called degrading work. In, “Never Settle is a Brag,”  the economist and futurist Robin Hanson critiques Steve Jobs’ advice that we shouldn’t settle for unfulfilling work. If everyone followed Jobs’ counsel a lot of needed work would go undone. Note too that the advice works best for the talented, so by advising others to not settle for anything less than work they love, you signal your status. You are bragging. Finally in “Is Do What You Love Elitist?” philosophical blogger Mark Linsenmayer recognizes the flaws in Jobs’ prescriptions but finds in them an obvious truth too—the good life requires that we not be wage slaves in a market economic system. Thus we should change the system so that work can be more satisfying.  

I agree with Marino that doing our duty, even if it doesn’t make us happy, is admirable. And I agree with Tokumitsu and Hanson that elitists, who often do the most interesting work, fail to value more mundane work. But I think that Linsenmayer makes the most important point. We need a new economic system—one where we can develop our talents and actualize our potential. Most of us are too good for the work we do, not because we are better than others, but because the work available in our current system is not good enough for any of us—it is often not satisfying. (I have written about his previously.) As Marx wrote almost two hundred years ago, most of us are alienated from the work we do, and thus ultimately alienated from ourselves a lot of the time.

Still we do not live in an ideal world. So what practical counsel do we give others, in our current time and place? Unfortunately my advice is dull and unremarkable, like so much of the available work. For now the best recommendation is something like: do the least objectionable/most satisfying work available given your options. That we can’t say more reveals the gap between the real and the ideal, which is itself symptomatic of a flawed society. Perhaps working to change the world so that people can engage in satisfying work is the most meaningful work of all.


6 thoughts on “Should you “Do What You Love?”

  1. I would say that typical proverb: “Don’t do what you love, love what you do.” It’s just about always being happy inside, adapting to the circumstances around us. I think there lies true happiness.

    Beautiful post

  2. You are right that much of the answer is in being content. Studies of happiness–which have been addressed on this post–point out that what you say is in large part correct. Thanks for the comment and there are more posts on love forthcoming.

  3. I think about this all of the time! I genuinely believe that the nature of our economic system is demanding wasted human potential. We create as a society worker bees. That is not to say that doing manual labor is not incredibly valuable and in many cases rewarding, but our system almost discourages ingenuity. I think technology is advanced enough now that we should be rethinking the nature of jobs as a whole and moving toward a system in which progress is the focus rather than maintenance. How do we change the system I don’t know, but what I do know is that I am capable of more than the monotonous work I do now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *