Verified by 
Key points
- John Ruskin's ideas offer timeless insights into human motivation, purpose, and the psychology of work.
- Automation risks stripping work of the creativity and meaning that give it personal value.
- Ruskin’s views on work and creativity align with modern psychological theories of autonomy and fulfillment.
- Crafting meaningful work means valuing the human effort behind the work, not just the outcome.
Building a career in the age of automation can feel overwhelming and difficult to plan. Yet the psychological challenges we face today are nothing new; the 21st century isn't the first era to fear machines subverting or replacing our humanity. We can draw powerful lessons from past thinkers who faced similar upheavals in radically different times.
The rise of industrial automation in the 19th century, for instance, sparked widespread anxiety about whether it would crush creativity, destroy art, and strip people of their agency. These fears were not irrational; the working conditions in many factories and workhouses were appalling.
Yet that same period also sparked a revolution in thought. Thinkers began to reconsider art, work, and human collaboration in new ways. There were debates and innovations in an era that redefined what it meant to create, innovate, and build a meaningful life in the face of rapid change.
One of the most outspoken critics of automation was John Ruskin, who fiercely opposed mechanization's assault on human labor and creativity. His vision of human agency and craftsmanship shaped generations of thinkers and movements—and remains strikingly relevant today.
Ruskin was a polymath. He was an art critic, geologist, vicious social commentator, philanthropist, and professor. He was preoccupied with how industrialization was reshaping work.
He saw the danger in reducing people to cogs in a machine, where work became about nothing more than productivity. For Ruskin, work had a much deeper significance. It was not just a means to an end but an essential part of shaping who we are as individuals. His writings give us a framework for finding meaning in work that seems to be overcome with automation.
Rediscovering Meaningful Work
Ruskin believed good work required thoughtful engagement. In The Stones of Venice, he argued that it wasn’t just the final product that mattered, but the care and process behind it. Machine-made items, even if perfect, lacked the human touch. Small imperfections and variations reflect human skill, but also reveal more about the humanity and soul of the maker.
Ruskin urged everyone to value work that allows for this thoughtfulness, where human effort is evident in the result. He was also ahead of his time criticizing poor working conditions, arguing that we shouldn’t take pride in owning objects made by devaluing the workers who created them.
There is a confluence between these ideas and the concept of flow: the psychological state where individuals are fully immersed and engaged in their tasks, finding joy and meaning in the process. We should aspire to create flow in our own work and appreciate the work of others who have achieved a similar mastery—valuing the human effort, agency, and creativity that bring depth and meaning to the result.
The Value of Human Effort
Ruskin despised the way industrial labor turned people into interchangeable, faceless tools, disconnected from the final product. Ruskin believed work should give individuals a meaningful role in the larger process, not reduce them to mechanical tasks.
He used the example of stonemasons working on cathedrals. While the masons didn’t design the cathedral, the excellence of their work and individual creativity is evident in the stone carvings and sculptures—small, beautiful contributions with imperfections, eccentricities, and unique perspectives that provide depth and richness to a greater whole. Their work is captivating both in its individual detail and when stepping back to see the full, spectacular result.
Today, we'd frame this as self-determination theory, which highlights autonomy, competence, and relatedness as key psychological needs. When people have control over their work and can express creativity, they’re more motivated and fulfilled.
Crafting a Role with Purpose
Ruskin believed the value of work was not in its output but in what the worker became from it. For him, satisfaction came from the act of creativity, whereas turning workers into automatons was soul-destroying.
Today, it’s easy to focus on what automation promises to produce—more efficiency, higher output—without considering the experience of the people doing the work. Ruskin’s insights remind us that the process matters. The ability to find meaning in what you’re doing, even if it’s repetitive or imperfect, is critical to feeling fulfilled.
Psychologists today would explain this in terms of job crafting, where workers shape their roles to make them more personally meaningful. The key is to automate the boring, repetitive tasks while holding onto the parts that bring personal satisfaction and purpose. Automating the most interesting and fulfilling aspects of your work risks erasing the joy and engagement that come from doing what matters.
Often the most intellectually challenging work is the most fulfilling, but sometimes doing the challenging but worthwhile work slows us down. Don’t let efficiency steal the fulfillment that comes from the most meaningful but time-consuming tasks.
Insights for Another Age of Automation
As automation advances, John Ruskin’s thoughts on creativity, autonomy, and thoughtful labor remain strikingly relevant. His ideas challenge us to rethink what work should be in the age of machines.
We can use automation for all sorts of tasks but if we allow it to strip away the elements of work that make it meaningful, we risk losing something vital. Ruskin’s vision of work was one where human creativity, agency, and joy in the process were central.
Ruskin’s ideas can be framed in psychological terms, but his original work offers a more profound view of humanity—one that embraces beauty, transcendence, and a deep sense of appreciation for the natural world, human society, and the fundamental connection between the two. His philosophy on good work and aesthetic appreciation is far greater than the sum of its parts. That’s the lesson we need to carry forward as we shape the future of work in an automated world.
References
Collicut, J. (2022). “Human kind Cannot bear very much reality”: the relationship between John Ruskin’s visionary aspiration and his mental health. Mental health, religion and culture, 25(3), 231-246.
Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 19-43.
Newman, G. E., & Bloom, P. (2012). Art and authenticity: The importance of originals in judgments of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3), 558–569.
Ruskin, J. (1854). The Stones of Venice. Smith, Elder and Co.
Wilmer, C. (1985). (Ed.). John Ruskin. Unto this last and other writings. Penguin Classics.
Zhang, F. & Parker, S. K. (2019). Reorienting job crafting research: A hierarchical structure of job crafting concepts and integrative review. The Annual Job Review, 40(2), 126-146.
