
Editorial by Managing Director Alexander De Beir
On the rising demand for freelancers and the moral dimension of work
Two weeks ago, an article in De Tijd reported that the demand for freelancers in Flanders has risen by 32% over the past five years, reaching nearly 180,000. According to Danny Van Assche from UNIZO, both clients and freelancers themselves increasingly seek more flexibility.
Other factors likely contribute to the growing desire for more freedom in work. I often meet people, both young and old, who are in search of “meaning” in what they do. It’s no surprise, then, that a few years ago, the “School for Moral Ambition” was founded in the Netherlands with the mission of helping people move toward careers with positive impact. This focus on morality inspired me to delve into the history of philosophy, specifically to explore whether work has always held moral importance.
Greek philosophers: social and moral aspects
In the 4th century BC, Plato, in his work The Republic, defined work as “an economic activity that enables individuals to satisfy their needs, such as food, shelter, and clothing.” He highlighted the social value of work but also warned of certain risks that could “dehumanize” work, such as extreme task specialization, which might prevent workers from utilizing their full physical or mental capacities.
Plato’s disciple, Aristotle, was the first to associate work with morality, viewing it as a means to shape individuals morally. To Aristotle, work was a duty, and the habit of working was a virtue. He further explained that virtue is the habit of goodness. Thus, a person who works is, in his view, a better, more moral person, someone whose character is more fully developed because they strive to surpass themselves.
Kant: work as a blessing
In the 18th century, Immanuel Kant expanded on Aristotle’s ideas, also associating work with duty. Without specifying who imposes this duty, Kant believed that work prevents individuals from succumbing to idleness. “One must occupy oneself,” he stated. To him, work was a blessing, saving people from the futility of a purposeless existence.
Kant added a pedagogical dimension to work, enabling individuals to develop their abilities, make progress, and improve themselves. He saw humans as fundamentally incomplete and perfectible.
For Kant, work had the potential to become a moral virtue, stating, “It allows the worker to achieve fulfillment through the demands placed upon them.“
Kant was critical of human nature, fearing that, if left to their own devices, people would be unlikely to put in the effort to develop their capacities due to a strong inclination toward freedom. Instead, “to improve oneself, to cultivate oneself, to develop morality within oneself, a person must work.” This duty aligns with a moral view of human nature fundamentally oriented toward goodness.
Kant concluded his argument by asserting that, while work may not necessarily make us happier, it certainly makes us more dignified and brings us closer to our full humanity.
Hegel and social recognition
For Hegel, work separates humans from a direct consumptive relationship with objects, confronting them with material resistance: “Labor is restrained desire. Work shapes the individual.“
He also saw that people work with purpose: for better reputation, higher social standing. They work to gain social recognition and earn a respectable income. Different jobs have different values, but all are honorable.
Work provides a means to affirm and exploit human intelligence. According to Hegel, it is because people can make their mark on their environment that they derive satisfaction from work.
Arendt and Achterhuis: freedom and meaning
Hannah Arendt identified three activities that together form the vita activa—our active life: labor, work, and action. She described labor as the activity humans share with animals, meeting the biological necessity of production and consumption. She noted that, in Classical Antiquity, labor was often assigned to the less privileged, including women and children. Work, by contrast, was a distinctly human expression. Objects like tools or buildings are human creations that stand before us, forming our non-natural, human world. Arendt valued “action” as the highest human activity, unfolding in the public space that people create together, where true freedom can be experienced.
For the Dutch philosopher Hans Achterhuis, work was immensely important—not merely for its material rewards but because it largely defines who we are and shapes our self-perception. We seek work that suits us, allows us to develop, and enables us to express ourselves. Work is a source of meaning.
And you, what do you think?
Dozens of philosophers have expressed their views on the concept of work. I’ve mentioned a few here. They offer us a unique opportunity to journey through history, to see how their eras influenced their thoughts and vice versa. I encourage everyone to reflect on this themselves, perhaps guided by contemporary or classic works. Morality, duty, meaning, freedom—most people associate work with one or more of these values.
In this edition of TIP-IM, I am thrilled to introduce the young Flemish philosopher Michaël Vlerick, who discusses work from a different, perhaps even more fundamental perspective: happiness. I hope you enjoy this piece and that it, today or in the future, helps you become a happier person.