I've always felt that "In Praise of Idleness" would be the basis of the fictional post-scarcity economy of Star Trek (and it's likely that this essay influenced the screenwriters).
IMHO the first step to build an economic system where people work in a project because they want to, and not because they need to, is to defuse the protestant ethics that measure the worth of people based on how much they earn.
Russell's ideas could underline a new ethics that optimized the economy around what people likes to do the most, in special if the most unpleasant jobs can be automated away by robots.
> The protestant ethics that measure the worth of people based on how much they earn.
Curious how you got this idea lodged in your head. There are so many examples that refute it that it's hard to know where to start. There are other prominent cultures which are much more concerned with displays of wealth than protestants (Chinese, for example). And then there are sub-cultures within the U.S. that are also more concerned with displays of wealth (watch some rap videos). And, generally speaking, my life experience is that more devout -> less concerned with material wealth. Then there's the protestant sect (Calvinists) who split from the Catholics because they believed in predestination, which would rule out how much you earn as a path to moral worth (in addition to good works).
I think I haven't explained myself well. I was not referring to exhibition of wealth, but to the effort required to earn a living. Mesuring personal worth in terms of wealth would be a by-product of this, as a signal that you are being righteous and disciplined.
I.e. I was talking about the Lutheran work ethic, which considers hard work and frugality virtuous, and leisure and munificence as moral failures. Other cultures think of free time, and expending on oneself and loved ones, as esencial to enjoy life.
> I've always felt that "In Praise of Idleness" would be the basis of the fictional post-scarcity economy of Star Trek (and it's likely that this essay influenced the screenwriters).
The "problem" is that Star Trek has always been about the adventure at the frontier, with a quasi-military (and precisely how quasi varying based on series) organization exploring new worlds, meeting new civilizations, and fighting with well-known civilizations the Federation is currently struggling against. Very little time is devoted to the people at home actually living that post-scarcity existence.
(And, no, I don't see that as a problem. I like adventure-oriented Star Trek. It just means that these ideas have little relevance to that show.)
IMHO the first step to build an economic system where people work in a project because they want to, and not because they need to, is to defuse the protestant ethics that measure the worth of people based on how much they earn.
Russell's ideas could underline a new ethics that optimized the economy around what people likes to do the most, in special if the most unpleasant jobs can be automated away by robots.