“IN PRAISE OF IDLENESS” BY BERTRAND RUSSELL

SHORT SUMMARY & CRITICAL APPRECIATION

This book contains the essays on such aspects of social questions as are ignored in clash of
politics. It shows the dangers of too much organization in thought and action. It explains why
Bertrand Russell is not agreed on Fascism or communism. The importance of knowledge
consists not only in its direct practicality but also in the fact that it promotes contemplative
habit of mind. The book concludes that there is risk of insects defeating the human race. It
also discusses the characteristics of western Civilization, and the nature of the soul.

In the essay, “In Praise of Idleness” Russell says that without considerable amount of
leisure a man is cut off from many of the best things. There is no reason why the bulk of
population should suffer this deprivation. Only foolish self-denial makes us continue to insist
on work in excess he need no longer exists.

Russell says that, in the past, there was a small leisure class and a large working class.
The leisure class enjoyed the advantage for which there was no basis in social justice. This
made it necessarily oppressive, cruel and without sympathy. Moreover, it invented theories
to justify its luxuries. These facts contributed of what we call civilization. It cultivated the art
and sciences; it wrote the books, invented the philosophies, and refined social relations.
Without the leisure class, humankind would never have emerged from barbarianism.

Russell, in this essay, argues that there must be adoption of three-day working week.
It would solve many of the problems of the world. However, there has been past much time
since the writing of this book, yet its valuable lessons have not been learnt. This is the book
worth reading.

In this essay, Lord Bertrand Russell proposes a cut in the definition of full time to four
hours per day. As this article was written in 1932, he has not the benefit of knowing that, as
we added more wage earners per family (Women entered the work force.) and families
shrunk, an the means of production became more efficient the number of hours each wage-
earner must work to support the family has stayed constant. These facts seem to support
Russell’s point.

This essay is stylistically interesting, and comprehensive, but it does not introduce the
philosophy that it should. Russell is the first to admit that he does not understand some of
the philosophers he covers, but some of his treatments are just plain wrong. The essay “In
Praise of Idleness” is potentially useful contribution of Russell. He proposes that we need to
abandon the idea that work is good in itself, and to minimize the amount of work to do. Such
a view has been wholly absent from the philosophy of work for the past 500 years or more.
Initially idleness may have been rejected for religious reasons but now it is rejected on
economic basis.

Russell writes approvingly about the good influence of Christianity on the Western
Civilization; he even goes to the extent of calling Fascism “a return to the worst in Paganism.”
The basic objection on Fascism is that there alone a part of human kind is the holder of
power; but according to Russell, Christianity, in theory has always recognized each human

1
soul as an end in itself, and not a mere means to glory of others. Modern democracy has
derived strength from the moral ideals of Christianity.

Russell has some interesting things to say about anthropology. He says that the
anthropologist selects and interprets facts according to the present day common prejudices.
Russell says, “The educational machine, throughout the Western Civilization, is dominated by
two ethical theories: that of Christianity and that of Nationalism. These two, when taken
seriously, are incompatible, as is being evident in Germany.”

Russell says in his essay that savings are the cause of many evils. He is trying to
convince that idleness is good for people. One of the commonest things to do with savings is
to lend them to some Government. In view of the fact that the bulk of the public
expenditures of the most civilized Governments consists in payment for past wars or
preparation of future wars; the man who lends his money to a Government is in the same
position as the bad men in Shakespeare who hired murderers. Therefore, it would be better if
he spent the money even in drink or gambling.

When Russell points for the reduction of the amount of human work, he is satirical but
his point is serious. He says that work is of two kinds: first altering the position of matter at or
near the earth relatively to the other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The
first kind is pleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid.

The second kind of work is extensible: there are not only those who give orders, but
those who give orders, but those who give advice as to what orders should be given. Usually
opposite kinds of advice are given simultaneously by two organized bodies of men; this is
called politics.

Then, Russell says about idleness and wants us understand that the idleness he is for,
is not that of the idle rich. From the beginning of the civilization until the Industrial
Revolution, a man could produce by hard work little more than was required for the
subsistence of himself and his family, although his wife worked at least as hard as he did, and
his children added their labour as soon as they are old enough to do so. The small surplus
above necessaries was not left to those who produced it, but it was used by warriors and
priests. This system had much impression upon men’s thoughts and opinions. Modern
technique has made it possible for leisure, within limits to be not advantage of small
privileged classes, but a right evenly distributed throughout the community. This morality of
work is the morality of slaves and modern world has no need of slavery.

Overall, the essay is very interesting. It is bit satiric in the beginning but as the reader
goes on it becomes serious. However, many of his arguments are logical and sensible but the
overall impression of the essay is that Russell suffers from the “Ivory Tower” syndrome in
relation to his talk about educational institutions. He thinks that more leisure time is the
solution to society faults. The fact is that it would lead to the world of his visions. Some bad
people are just bad, and no amount of leisure time will make them good. The worst part is,
these bad people are generally the one who create successive generations of bad people,
perpetuating the problem. Written & Composed By:

Prof. A. R. Somroo

Cell: 03339971417