BarterClub@sh.itjust.worksM to Antiwork@lemmy.worldEnglish · 8 months agoFry cooksi.imgur.comimagemessage-square374fedilinkarrow-up11.49Karrow-down135
arrow-up11.45Karrow-down1imageFry cooksi.imgur.comBarterClub@sh.itjust.worksM to Antiwork@lemmy.worldEnglish · 8 months agomessage-square374fedilink
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down2·edit-28 months agoIf the means of completing a task must be learned, then the task requires skill.
minus-squareotp@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·8 months agoRequiring skill doesn’t make it “skilled labour”, though. The phrase means more than “labour that requires something that meets the definition of skill”.
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down2·8 months agoWho determines the definition, and toward what ends?
minus-squareotp@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up2·8 months agoInvestopedia has a definiton.. It seems to provide a breakdown of a lot of related terms. I also would make the argument that not everything that needs to be learned should be described as “skilled”. Saying the word “the” needs to be learned. I wouldn’t describe saying “the” as “skilled”.
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·8 months agoWhat is your intention from “should”? From your suggestion, whose interests are being protected, and whose harmed? Why should anyone in particular dominate the process of establishing usages?
minus-squareotp@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up3arrow-down1·8 months ago Why should anyone in particular dominate the process of establishing usages? Why should you be the one who defines skilled labour? What benefit is there to collapsing the definitions of unskilled, semi-skilled, and highly skilled labour into skilled labour?
minus-squareunfreeradical@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down3·8 months agoHow have I expressed the intention you have attributed to me? I asked why anyone should dominate.
If the means of completing a task must be learned, then the task requires skill.
Requiring skill doesn’t make it “skilled labour”, though. The phrase means more than “labour that requires something that meets the definition of skill”.
Who determines the definition, and toward what ends?
Investopedia has a definiton.. It seems to provide a breakdown of a lot of related terms.
I also would make the argument that not everything that needs to be learned should be described as “skilled”.
Saying the word “the” needs to be learned. I wouldn’t describe saying “the” as “skilled”.
What is your intention from “should”?
From your suggestion, whose interests are being protected, and whose harmed?
Why should anyone in particular dominate the process of establishing usages?
Why should you be the one who defines skilled labour?
What benefit is there to collapsing the definitions of unskilled, semi-skilled, and highly skilled labour into skilled labour?
How have I expressed the intention you have attributed to me?
I asked why anyone should dominate.