




































Evaia: International Journal of Ethics and Values, Volume 3, December, 2022 

 

31 
 

THEORIES OF WORK AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR WORK 

VALUE: A PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF WORK ETHICS 
 

Charles Kosolu Onebunne 

Department of Philosophy, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka 

Email – ck.onebunne@unizik.edu.ng 

 

 

Abstract 

Philosophy always enjoins us to, at one point or another, pause to reflect upon 

our lives. Such questions as these are philosophical questions - Why do we do 

the things we do? Why do we work? Why do we even need to work? Why do 

we choose the kind of work we have chosen? These are some questions that 

we always need to ask ourselves and others. However, our concern here relates 

to work. Thus, this study employs the method of analysis to examine and 

therefore analyse the nature of work as it relates to mankind; is work a 

necessary endeavour in the life of mankind? What is the value of work to 

mankind? These questions emanating from philosophical quest to comprehend 

mankind and work will in turn lead us to x-ray and analyse different theories 

of work especially as they affect the value attached to work as well as the 

output resulting from work. The study also examines some ethical issues at 

work places which are as a result of divergent values that are attached to work 

by different individuals. The study finally discloses that peoples’ 

understandings of work affect the value they attach to work which in turn 

affect their work output or productivity. 

Keywords: Theories of work, work ethics 

 

Introduction 

It is somewhat a general belief that it is in the nature of mankind to always 

work. What is, and what ought to be, the nature of work and what values are 

served by working? Apart from producing goods and services, providing 

employment serves as the most important social functions of work. Work is 

regarded as an important and in fact, an integral part of human life. Everyone 

wants, to be busy doing one thing or the other. Even children too; they are 

always busy with their hands. This demonstrates that they too desire to work. 

If this is the case, why is it that still, the very idea of work suggests drudgery, 

toil and something to be avoided if possible? This is the ambivalence that 

greets the nature of work so that even though work can be exalting, uplifting, 

fulfilling it could also be degrading, tedious, troublesome etc. 

 

Regarding the nature of work, Aristotle recognized work as necessary for the 

good life in the sense that one must work in order to live. For Karl Marx, work 



Evaia: International Journal of Ethics and Values, Volume 3, December, 2022 

 

32 
 

has the potential to express our very humanity but in modern capitalist 

societies at least, work is alienated from this end. Understanding the nature of 

work is very crucial because it affects individuals’ and institutions’ attitudes 

towards work. The way an individual sees work affects his/her behaviour at 

work place. It also has a role to play in the employer-employee relationship. 

 

Some Major Theories of Work 

Generally, work is understood in terms of a job and employment. This way, it 

is viewed as a means to an end. For instance, a means for attaining an income 

with which to satisfy some needs and desires such as buying food, paying for 

rent, paying bills, enrolling in school, living a comfortable life, etc. Following 

this mean-ends idea of work, it is rational that people will cleave for work that 

provides a higher pay. 

 

However, in life we see some persons who have chosen a lower paid work. 

When this kind of thing happens, some people question the rationale behind 

such seemingly irrational choice. The important thing it goes to portray is that 

there are different ideas about work as there are different people and that 

earning income is not all there is in working. There is more to it than ordinary 

eyes can see when it comes to value of work. Thus, the value people attach to 

work has to do with their conception and perception of work which goes a 

long way in having a lot of implications in work output. This paper examines 

the theories of work, namely; 

1. Conventional theory/model 

2. The human fulfillment theory/model 

3. The liberal theory/model 

 

1. The Conventional Theory/Model: This theory conceives of work as an 

endeavour that must be endured. This is so since the very understanding of 

work here is that work is difficult, arduous and laborious. This theory 

perceives work as having negative connotation. The essence of this 

conventional view is that “work is something to be avoided whenever possible 

and endured when we must”1. There are two versions of this theory, viz: 

classical version and hedonistic version. 
 

a. Classical Version: This version is traceable to classical Greek thought, 

which holds that there are higher and more meaningful activities than work so 

that work should be avoided in order that man should pursue those higher 

values. This version sees man as an intellectual being and work as a physical 

thing. This means that the very nature of work contradicts the nature and 

essence of man; work diminishes the human nature and potential. “This 

classical version postulates that work is meant for slaves and not for civilized 



Evaia: International Journal of Ethics and Values, Volume 3, December, 2022 

 

33 
 

people”2. In shedding light to the classical view, the Roman philosopher, 

Plutarch opines that “Gentlemen enjoy the contemplation of the sculptor’s 

master pieces, but he would never himself use hammer and chisel and get 

covered with sweat and dust”3. 

 

Still corroborating the views of the classical version, a twentieth century 

philosopher, Hannah Arendt, in her book, The human condition submits that: 

“In the modern age, laborers are about to be freed from the fetters of labour 

and this society no longer knows these higher and more meaningful activities 

for the sake of which this freedom would deserve to be won”4. 

 

b. Hedonistic Version: Hedonism suggests that pleasure is the most important 

thing in life. Hedonistic version of the conventional theory sees work as a 

necessary means for obtaining life’s pleasures. Work is necessary only if it is 

the price we must pay for enjoyable and pleasurable life. However, it did not 

specify what marks out a pleasurable life; instead it holds that it is left for 

individuals to choose whatever ends they so desire.  

The philosophical implication of the conventional theory which embodies 

both classical and hedonistic trends is that work has no value in its own right, 

it is simply a necessary price that must be tolerated to achieve other ends. 

 

2. The Human Fulfillment Theory: This theory conceives of work as the 

primary activity through which humans develop their full potentials as human 

beings. Both conventional and human fulfillment theories believe in human 

potentials. However, conventional theory holds that work hinders that 

potential. On its part, human fulfillment theory holds that work develops that 

potential. “Man has a natural teleos so that the good life is life spent 

developing or fulfilling that telos”5. To better comprehend this theory we can 

turn our eyes to comparing work and unemployment, more precisely, the 

psychic implications of unemployment. They include: loss of self-esteem, loss 

of self-respect, stress, anxiety, depression, isolation, lack of focus and 

direction, etc. On the other hand, work provides the opposite, namely: high 

self-respect, stable mental and physical health, friendship, sense of purpose, 

sense of direction, etc.  

 

It is good to mention here that the human fulfillment theory acknowledges that 

not every work contributes to the development of human potential. It is only 

the proper kind of work and the proper kind of workplace that can do that. The 

theory also holds that the individual and their work exist in a reciprocal 

fashion. Individuals exercise control and mastery over their work and work in 

turn shapes and builds the individual. Under this theory, the question every 

worker should ask is not ‘what will this work do for me?’ (as it is typical of 



Evaia: International Journal of Ethics and Values, Volume 3, December, 2022 

 

34 
 

conventional theory) but, ‘what will this work do to me?’ That is, what kind 

of person will I become by performing this work? This is while bearing in 

mind that work that does good things for me can do bad things to me. In 

making a distinction between good and bad work, E.F. Schumacher has this to 

say:  

Bad work is mechanical, artificial, divorced from nature, 

utilizing only the smallest part of man’s potential capabilities; 

it sentences the great majority of workers to spending their 

working lives in a way which contains no worthy challenge, no 

stimulus to self-perfection, no chance to development, no 

element of beauty, truth, or goodness.6 

 

Another sharp distinction between good work and bad work is contained in 

Karl Marx’s concept of Alienation. This concept suggests that good work 

draws out the potential in human whereas bad work represses it. Marx’s 

alienation is understood as a result of work preventing full development of 

human potential. Man is separated from their true selves (their potentials), 

from the products of their work, from the creative process of work itself and 

from their very essence of social creatures. 

Philosopher Al Gini, one of the proponents of Human Fulfillment theory, in 

expatiating upon this theory submits thus: 

Descartes was wrong. It isn’t cogito ergo sum, but, rather, 

laboro ergo sum. We need work, and as adults we find identity 

and are identical by the work we do. If this is true then we must 

be very careful about what we choose to do for a living, for 

what we do is what we’ll become. To paraphrase the words of 

Winston Churchill- First we choose and shape our work, then 

it shapes us.7  

 

3. The Liberal Theory: This theory emerged to serve as a middle ground 

between the earlier mentioned theories. Like the conventional model, liberals 

hold that individual workers are at liberty to choose the ends or raison d’ etre 

for their work. They still maintain that individuals choose to work for many 

reasons and so may willingly accept undesirable jobs simply as a means to 

earn income. However, they deny that there is a single human end which work 

serves.  

 

Again, like the human fulfillment theorists, liberals believe that human beings 

can be greatly influenced by their work. They equally are of the argument that 

ethical assessments of work should be made on the basis of how work affects 

workers. Incidentally, they part company with the fulfillment school when 

they specified the grounds for such assessment. Thus, whereas human 



Evaia: International Journal of Ethics and Values, Volume 3, December, 2022 

 

35 
 

fulfillment model bases judgment or assessment on some version of what 

makes a good and meaningful human life, liberals makes the judgment in 

relation to how work affects workers ability to make free and autonomous 

decisions about their own life. 

 

Rights of Employees/Workers 

Work is one of the most important and highly valued human activities mainly 

because it is necessary for so many other central human goods. That means 

that work is indispensable and inescapable. 

 

However, for most people it is something that is controlled by others while 

others control their own working lives. This fact points to a real vulnerability 

especially on the part of workers. This is why, in Ethics of Work, it is 

recognized that workers should be protected by rights that impose duties on 

others (especially the employers) to respect their interests.  

For purposes of exactness, these rights have been categorized into three 

namely: 

i. Legal Rights 

ii. Contractual Rights 

iii. Moral Rights 

iv.  

i. Legal Rights: These are those rights that are granted to workers or 

employees on the basis of legislation or judicial rulings. Some of these rights 

include right to a minimum wage, right to equal opportunity, right to bargain 

collectively as part of a union, right to fair hearing, right to due process etc. In 

effect, legal rights set the basic legal framework for employer-employee 

relationship. 

   

ii. Contractual Rights: These are those rights that accrue to employees on the 

basis of contractual agreements with employers. Contractual right is narrower 

in scope than the legal right. This is because it differs from one work place to 

another even under the same legal setting. It equally differs from employee to 

employee. For instance, a particular employee might have a right to a specific 

health care package such as paid holidays, pension funds and such likes which 

other workers under the same work establishment might not have. 

 

iii. Moral Rights: The human person is a special creature that occupies a 

special place. Therefore, should not be treated as a means to an end but as an 

end in itself. Thus, “moral rights are those entitlements to which employees 

have a claim independent of any legal or contractual factor”8. Such rights 

follow from the respect owed to employees as human beings. These rights are 

based on reason.   



Evaia: International Journal of Ethics and Values, Volume 3, December, 2022 

 

36 
 

Conclusion 

The various theories of work as have been explained suggest that the way 

people view work really affects their performance in whatever work they have 

taken. For instance, if someone chose a work to build and develop himself 

through the work, there is every likelihood that the person will choose to 

remain in the work irrespective of the pay or earning. Same applies to those 

who chose a particular work simply because of the pay. This kind of person is 

likely to not put in his best to the work. As a result, the work suffers as there 

is every reason to have low productivity. The only interest for this kind of 

person is his pay. He is not necessarily interested in developing or building 

himself through his work. What is more, he is not interested in keeping to the 

ethics of work. All he is interested in is his pay. Most of these people believe 

that one does not need to work hard but rather work smartly. There is a whole 

lot of negative implications of this kind of belief system. One of such 

implications is – do not work hard as long as you can pretend to be working 

hard and as long as you get paid.  One can therefore imagine what the work 

environment will be like if every worker is to go with this king of negative 

attitude towards work. 

 

References 

1. J. Desjardins, An Introduction to Business Ethics, 2nd ed, (New 

York: McGraw Hill Companies Inc., 2006), p.86. 

2. Ibid.  

3. Plutarch, Lives (New York: Modern Library, 1932), p.132. 

4. H. Arendt, The Human Condition, (Chicago: University of Chicago 

Press, 1958), p.5. 

5. J. Desjardins, p.87. 

6. E.F. Schumacher, Good Work, (New York: Harper Colophon Books, 

1980), p.27. 

7. A. Gini, “Work, Identify and Self: How we are formed by the work we 

do”, Journal of Business Ethics, 17, (1998), p. 714. 

8. J. Desjardins, p.99. 

 

 


