Adam Smith vs. Karl Marks: The division of labor

Smith notes in his “Wealth of Nations” that the division of labor betters society. Things can be produced more quickly by a greater number of laborers specializing in a single skill than by a single worker attempting various tasks. This one worker may not be completely apt at all the components to complete the entire desired product. A larger number of workers that can each be well adapted for a certain part of the whole product would be much more sufficient.

Smith states the now famous example of the pin makers. Smith once saw a small manufactory with a few men attempting to each do three different operations, but each man could only manage to his task slowly and inefficiently. (Smith, 5) However, once an individual can master a certain part of pin making, therefore doing his part and allowing his fellow workers do what they know to do best, production rapidly improves and speeds up.

Smith makes his example very specific in explaining that each person does one job and only one job. If each creates the greater part of the whole, then it will be beneficial. Marx explains how this can come to be. He states that one capitalist may employ a few men who are all skilled at a certain craft (he notes the craft of making paper, twain, or needles, it doesn’t matter which craft), that may each still be doing their usual work and producing single products each. In this manner the worker is still doing his profession. But what if demand rises? Then it is inevitable that they will be ordered by their employer to divide their labor, as they are all skilled at each component that will accomplish the final result. (Marx, 456)

Once factories expand and more workers are employed, the idea of men still interacting with people of other crafts is noted. It is irrelevant though, since each man is now only programmed to work a certain type of work. Even if within a factory there are many skills involved in producing a single ultimate item, it is most likely that there will be a series of collective groups, all who specialize in their own work, that will be seen still individualized from the larger whole into little more than the greater parts of a machine.

Essentially, all these workers are being devoid of diversifying themselves into their own interests. They are devoid of leisure or at least thought process. Just as Smith said, their minds will deteriorate. These workers become little more than mechanical providers. They will only use one set of tools. They will have no joy in

Some topics in this essay:
Adam Smith, Ultimately Marx’s, division labor, marx 483, marx 483 smith, producing single, 483 smith, job job, nuts bolts,