A) Anyone (who is middle-class or richer) who works more than 40 hours a week is performing, not a job, but a spiritual discipline.
If not A, then B) anyone (who is not middle-class or richer) who works more tha 60 hours a week is performing, not a job, but a spiritual discipline.
But is it worth it?
I’m not sure what would constitute a proof or refutation of these claims. But maybe that’s the point.
Point taken.
Maybe I should have said more about where this was coming from. The forty hour work week assumes/enables a certain division between labor and leisure, work and family. I’m wondering if those who (voluntarily) work more than that, by annhilating the work/leisure divide, are practicing something of an ascetic lifestyle. If that’s true, we can go on to ask what the practices of that discipline are, who is sanctioning it, and what its goal is. And thereby to critique these money monks.