RE: Economic Concepts #2 - Specialisation
Great post again, Spectrum! I hope you don't mind if I contribute a few thoughts of my own, all of which are :
There is no doubt that, in the overall aggregate, the benefits of specialization and trade have far outweighed the costs... but this does not mean that there aren't costs to watch out for all the same.
There are, then, three potential downsides of which we must remain weary:
Mechanization. OP already introduced the idea that by specializing in the same, overly-repetitive action, we can specialize ourselves into a boring, if not miserable existence.
Over-specialization. Specialization is a process in which larger tasks tend to be broken down into smaller ones. The smaller and more specialized the task becomes, however, the more likely is it to be replaced by a machine. As such, there is a threat that I will dedicate my life to specializing in X, just to have my job replaced by a machine, at which point I am no longer qualified to "specialize" in any other paid job.
Division of Responsibility. The division of labor necessarily brings with it a division of knowledge and a division of social/moral responsibility. For example, Europeans in the 19th century could easily condemn New World slavery as barbaric while at the same time supporting that institution through their purchasing decisions. Indeed, since low-cost, slave labor had pretty much put all competition out of business in some markets, the European consumers had little option but to support New World slavery. Specialization does not necessarily create these contradictions, but it does make them harder to identify and eradicate.
Hi @paradigms.lost, I upvoted this comment as part of my Good Comment Initiative. I love that you engaged with the content of the original poster and added further food for thought, sparking some nice Steemit interaction here in the comments.
I am trying to support great commenters like yourself and encourage others to take the time to leave honest thoughtful comments. If you agree to let me quote some or all of your comment, it may be featured in an upcoming post as an example of great commenting. Please reply to let me know if you approve of this use of your terrific comment :) Cheers - R-bot
@r-bot, that's perfectly fine with me. Anything to get the dialogue going!
Thanks for that @paradigms.lost. You make a quite a few really good points in your response. The risks and downsides to specialisation mostly fall on the side of the specialised individuals rather than the producers themselves. This is probably why specialisation is still so strongly promoted.
There is also a difference in the type of specialisation. Specialisation in tasks that are repetitive and require very little cognitive thought process are likely to be boring, unsatisfying, and at risk of replacement by machine. This type of specialisation is also likely to be exploited in countries that have low-cost/slave labour.
There is also specialisation in jobs such as academia and science. Jobs that require skills that cannot be easily replicated by machines and are also mentally stimulating. These types of jobs benefit from specialisation. Even these jobs can cause isolation from the real world and create the problem of ivory tower syndrome. It can be easy to get too wrapped up in a particular area of specialisation and lose track of the bigger picture.
You're exactly right about the isolation from others in the world. We just need to be careful that we don't give the threat of isolation carte blanche since that is the bread and butter of Marxists.