Abstract

Mohandas Gandhi had an interesting conception called “work ethic”. It propounded that one ought to focus on the process of work rather than the result of the work. “Full effort is thus full victory” in Gandhi’s conception. This is because the result can be corrupted with self interest maximization of the productive sector of society. I translated this concept into the rigour of analytical philosophy with original thought experiments, Kantian contractarianism etc. I submitted that Gandhi reached a different conclusion despite unintentionally sharing the same methodology of western/analytical philosophers such as John Rawls, Gerald Cohen, T M Scanlon and others. I reiterate that the methodology pertained to Kantian contractarianism and intuitive ethics. Precisely, the different conclusion was that Gandhi espoused much lesser desert, incentives, social appraisal. In contrast, Rawls, Cohen, Ronald Dworkin, Scanlon et al allowed comparatively more desert, incentives and social appraisal. Lesser desert, incentives, social appraisal for the productive individuals creates higher taxes for these privileged individuals and this benefits the least advantaged. This is individual ethic but it can be the groundwork or an emerging ethos for future institutional implementations i.e. higher taxes levied on the privileged. As an example, the relevance is that Gandhi’s “work ethic” submitted that luxury consumption is regrettable and one ought to conscientiously and personally struggle to reduce this without external or governmental coercion. Contrarily, Dworkin, Rawls, Scanlon, Cohen and others respect luxury consumption as personal pursuits, especially with Cohen's latest statements and Rawls' “rational plan” concept. There are several illustrations in the thesis to demonstrate the main contribution of the thesis i.e. Gandhi’s conception espoused much lesser desert, incentives, social appraisal compared to the research of Dworkin, Rawls, Scanlon, Cohen and others. It, additionally, in the seventh chapter, submitted that humility is vital because it can provide a response in a world saturated by undeserved suffering. Humility is connected to “work ethic”. Gandhi's definition of humility is novel. It is different from the existing definitions in political theory, different from Kellenberger’s and Cooper’s account on humility, for example. The juxtaposition of Gandhi’s and Dostoevsky’s oeuvre engenders a nuanced understanding of humility. Crucially, it has significant benefits in the field of distributive justice/solidarity. It addresses many of the challenges traditionally associated with humility. Ralph Ellison, drawing from his perspective as a Black American in segregation times, propounded that humility is susceptible to be used to further oppress the already oppressed. This thesis asserts that Gandhi’s earlier writings indeed embody the dangers delineated by Ellison. However, Gandhi’s later writings not only respond to this cogent argument but also enhances it. Both Ellison and Gandhi reinvent humility as the ability of the marginalised to perform service without self promotion while not being obsequious to those in power.