Details

Created: 20 March 2025

In 1930, economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that by the 21st century, society would be so advanced that people would only need to work fifteen hours per week. An article a few years ago in The Atlantic on the topic of “workism” notes that Keynes wasn’t entirely wrong.

In certain demographics, people are working less hours than in previous generations. However, there are other demographics, particularly wealthier men, where the trend is moving the other way. The author defines “workism” as “the belief that work is not only necessary to economic production, but also the centerpiece of one’s identity and life’s purpose; and the belief that any policy to promote human welfare must always encourage more work.”

Judaism has a different perspective. In his monumental Torah commentary, Sefat Emet, Rav. Yehuda Leib Alter (1847-1905, Poland) brings the following question from his grandfather, Rav. Yitzchak Meir Alter, (known as the Chidushei HaRim). Parashot Terumah and Tetzaveh discuss the building of the Mishkan. They are followed by parashat Ki Tisa, which concludes the construction of the Mishkan and then goes on to discuss Shabbat and the sin of the golden calf. However, parashat Vayakhel does the opposite. It begins with a discussion of Shabbat and only then transitions to the building of the Mishkan. Why the difference? 

He suggests that before the sin of the golden calf, the ideal was that we work for six days as preparation for Shabbat. After the sin of the golden calf, we first need Shabbat to set the tone for the coming week.

For a Jew, whether we look at Shabbat first or last chronologically, Shabbat is what defines the workplace. Whereas workism puts work as “the centerpiece of one’s identity and life’s purpose,” “Shabbatism” puts Shabbat and other spiritual pursuits as the centerpiece of one’s identity and life purpose. From a Jewish perspective, working hard is fine, as long as it serves as a means of preparing for Shabbat and the other important values in our lives.