Alina Plitman

In the context of social sustainability, the concept of responsibility is examined from a compatibilist position regarding individual decisions. First, the concept of responsibility is considered from a compatibilist perspective, differentiating between individual and collective responsibility. The idea of responsibility as an awareness of the possible consequences of actions is discussed. In the second part, human dignity is considered like an awareness of the inalienable value of the individual, which does not depend on individual experiences or actions but is viewed as an inherent characteristic of the self. The third part discusses the distinction between moral obligation and commitment, noting that the duty to work depends not solely on the necessity to earn money but on an awareness of the social order that requires participation in socially relevant activities. Finally, the moral duty to work is viewed as a social significance expected from every member of society to make a reasonable contribution to the community. It is discussed how this duty can be reconciled with the consumption of public goods and the influence of capital income on work ethics. Discussing these concepts contributes to a deeper understanding of the ethical foundations of individual action in society.

In the context of social sustainability, the concept of responsibility is examined from a compatibilist position regarding individual decisions. First, the concept of responsibility is considered from a compatibilist perspective, differentiating between individual and collective responsibility. The idea of responsibility as an awareness of the possible consequences of actions is discussed. In the second part, human dignity is considered like an awareness of the inalienable value of the individual, which does not depend on individual experiences or actions but is viewed as an inherent characteristic of the self. The third part discusses the distinction between moral obligation and commitment, noting that the duty to work depends not solely on the necessity to earn money but on an awareness of the social order that requires participation in socially relevant activities. Finally, the moral duty to work is viewed as a social significance expected from every member of society to make a reasonable contribution to the community. It is discussed how this duty can be reconciled with the consumption of public goods and the influence of capital income on work ethics. Discussing these concepts contributes to a deeper understanding of the ethical foundations of individual action in society.

The concept of work that we use today does not describe or explain the modern working format. This outdated concept makes it impossible to approach such a solution as universal basic income (UBI). Exploring the pairs of terms that describe the concept of work in several languages, we discover two distinct semantic levels of the concept of work — the toi ling and the creating concepts. The phenomenon of work occurs in two areas and on two levels — as a life process and as a social process, on the mental and physical levels. The anthropological work concept by Arendt is unsuitable because it is not complete for modern comprehension of working. In contrast, I will develop a new concept of work as creating that contains all the necessary components of work, allowing me to include the freedom concept into work and eliminate the labor suffering from the concept of work. This revised concept of work is more suitable for describing intellectual work, making it possible to consider work as a basic human need. Hence, work is no longer a mere trait of animal laborans but a means to attain fun, satisfaction, and autonomy.