Search Results

Economic Valuation and the Ranking of Humans Society, and the population as a whole, enact a ranking system every day, all the time. This ranking system is a valuation system that ranks humans by their corresponding value. Their value is derived from how well they participate in society. How well they participate in society is derived by how much profit they produce. However, the profit produced is not how much profit they produce within an infinite amount of system possibilities. The system is set. The profit is produced within this set system. This set system is a capitalist economy which establishes profit first; profit to drive every other factor. Therefore, the system we are judged by is a system that was formed by profit first, then unfolds all other functions from this underlying principle. “Does the structure of our profit driven economy create the basis for the exclusion that those with limited mobility experience within society?” This type of ranking system did not begin with mankind. It began with colonization. In order to conquer over a person, colonizers had to establish a disconnect from the human and a constant refocusing to profit-first systems. Set systems were put into place all over the world. Beforehand, systems were alive, adaptable, and flexible given the geographic location and specific population. All contributions were accepted and honored as value. People were placed in roles that were supportive to them and their bodies. Afterward, systems were concrete and set, a generic one size fits all. This type of system is what rules today. It is this ranking system that is the reason why those with limited mobility are excluded. It is the reason why society has ranked and assigned value based on how much profit one contributes. Colonization established many profit centric systems that valued profit over human life and systems that we still follow today. In this series... I’m studying those with limited mobility in relation to the profit driven economy because I want to find out whether the design of the market creates social isolation and a devaluation, in economic terms, of those with limited mobility in society as a whole. Does the structure of our profit driven economy create the basis for the exclusion that those with limited mobility experience within society? Assigning value to people began within the workplace, the value assigned was based on how much they produced. That value judgment then became justified with the argument that some genes are stronger than others and the weaker genes should die off. All of this goes into society's preconceived notions about those with disabilities. In this series, I will provide a brief history of types of economies and review the literature within disability studies and economics.

A Brief Glance at the History of the Laborer and Economic Theory of Value Each economy throughout history has had its way of placing value on each laborer. Society has then assigned a hierarchy that is based on one’s career. The fact that the ranking system taking place is based on careers demonstrates how closely linked worth and work are. “The fact that the ranking system taking place is based on careers demonstrates how closely linked worth and work are.” Early Agricultural In early agricultural societies we find an example of the type of situation wherein a person can be assigned value directly based upon their production. The laborers, here, represent those members of society who are able bodied, strong and fit. These civilizations were set up around the most profitable industry. The most productive class was considered to be the farmers, then down to proprietors such as merchants. The sterile class was considered those who charged a fee for land; landlords (Mazzucato, 2016). Tools were used  for the purpose of producing as much as possible. The value of each laborer was in how much they could produce. The value of the business as a whole, lied in how much crop they could produce. In this model, each person’s worth lies in the amount of their production, thus quantifying the worth of a human soul. With such an intricate tie of self worth to production thus the race to production followed, of course, because who doesn’t want to be valued? Industrial Revolution In the 1800’s, the industrial revolution changed the value definition of a laborer. Hints of that change show us that the “price of labor is revealing their value” (Mazzucato, 2016). If the laborer is paid more, they are perceived as worth more. During this time, there is a rise of technology being used for production. The inventions were used to increase efficiency of production and maximize profit. At this time there are variances made between value creators and value takers. The labor theory of value focus is on reproduction. Neo-Liberalism The rise of neo-liberalism of the 1970’s to now has led to great innovations in technology and also an update on the way we view profit. There is a focus on how individuals make decisions with the advent of opportunity cost and profit (Mazzucato, 2016). Only now is economics beginning to factor in underlying motivations of choices through opportunity costs, but it is still multiplying that factor by the financial profit created in order to identify the laborer’s worth. Underlying Principles Beginning from a principle like this will always be limited. It is not coming from a human first model allowing all following operating systems to mimic the human body or allowing for the whole within many wholes of the human body to be the most valuable factor and point to begin from. Not only is defining civilization in this way, as a capitalist economy, limited, but it’s also dangerous. The danger lies in assigning worth and value to humans based on how well they can operate within the capitalist system. When we define value in this way, a large portion of humans are left out; are devalued. When people are devalued they will be left out even more. Thus that cycle compounds on itself. “Once each life has a value which may be calculated, and some lives have less value than others, such a politics has the obligation to exercise this judgment in the name of the race or the nation" (Rose, 2007). When people are devalued, their human rights are at risk. When people are devalued, they are not able to fully participate in society. They are not able to fully enjoy and embrace life and be embraced and enjoyed in return. As the person could not participate in profiting the society, they were seen as an outlier. As they were not bringing profit, they were not valued. Theoretical frameworks were established in order to support the ranking system. Two examples of such are the theory of eugenics and the Protestant workplace ideology. The rise of sterilization based on eugenics in the 1920’s and 30’s displayed how effective this theory is. Eugenics argued that there were those who were fit and healthy, balanced individuals. And that there were deformed, unable to participate, outliers who should be sterilized. However, The irony of this is that when we create human first systems, more profit is generated. When employees feel embraced, they create more. A survey study done and written about in the Harvard Business Review states that, “employees who feel welcome to express their authentic selves at work exhibit higher levels of organizational commitment, individual performance, and propensity to help others" (Goffee et. al., 2013). The research in this study showed how embracing the unique selves of your employees actually creates more profit for one’s company. Citations Goffee, R and Jones, G. (2000). Why Should Anyone Be Led By You?. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2000/09/why-should-anyone-be-led-by-you Mazzucato, M. “What is economic value and, who creates it.” Ted Talk Summit Conference. Published on July,  2019. Ted Talk video, 18:47. https://www.ted.com/talks/mariana_mazzucato_what_is_economic_value_and_who_creates_it. Rose, N. 2007. Politics of life itself: biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

In my Honors Thesis research paper, I wrote about how institutional ableism is taught at a young age and then reproduced throughout one’s life mainly due to lack of lived experience and lack of educational experience of disability. I identify this conditioning is because of covert processes, such as messaging in the spatial layout and absence of disability studies in education. The classroom is a place where the young learn world views. There they develop a sense of self and a support system to succeed in life. It is one of the most impactful spaces for early development and socialization. In school, familiar processes such as interacting only with abled children, are learned and reproduced throughout the rest of the child’s life. Children with (dis)abilities are divided from other students. They are taught separately and socialize separately. How do power dynamics implicit in built space impact children with and without (dis)abilities? “An understanding of how disabled people have become marginalized and excluded within society cannot be understood without an appreciation of the sociospatial processes that reproduce social relations (Kitchen, 1998).” Architecture & Ideology Due to the fact that ideology cannot be separated from built space and that the structures we create will always be a reflection of the ideology, when buildings are inaccessible that demonstrates that the ideology is exclusionary. I have found that exclusionary ideology is taught at a young age. Built space exemplifies power. But it doesn’t have to, as Dinulovic reminds. When “function of” architecture becomes inclusion, then built space is also a pathway for a transformation. Yet this requires architects to have both lived (secondary is fine) and academic experience of disability. Power in Built Space: Disability Studies Scholars Disability Studies scholars like Paul Hunt have identified disability as a result of our ideology, for example the social model that he created with others states that disabling structures segregate the person from participating fully in society and if those structures are changed, people with disabilities can participate more fully. Therefore, the ideology of institutional ableism represented through built space is a disabling factor. Other scholars focus on that having a condition of some sort is not an ending but a beginning of a new way of living, not a loss but a different way of living (Michalko, 2017). Other scholars remind us that built structures tell us what's appropriate and what’s not appropriate in terms of how to hold our body (Crowe, 2017). Or that in building and in the process of design, we make an assumption about what is to be valued and noticed, and what is to be marginalized and forgotten (Boys, 2017). Classroom This ideology is learned in the classroom through division into separate classrooms and many times separate school that have no joint activities, as well as different recess times, is reflective of sequestration into institutions. The children learn and socialize in divided spaces. “An understanding of how disabled people have become marginalized and excluded within society cannot be understood without an appreciation of the sociospatial processes that reproduce social relations (Kitchen, 1998).” Children of different abilities learn and socialize in a separate space divided from other children. Scholars have found that a development and emotional intelligence gained by doing things together, abled children develop understanding of diversity, unique abilities, empathy,  disabled children develop to a greater degree ( as would any child) when they can socialize with peers. Interview The expert interview demonstrates the importance of creating more opportunities that build a lived or educational experience of disability so that architects are not attempting to design something that they only have formal knowledge of, if any at all. Existing Data Burke is advocating for playgrounds that use Universal Design, she argues that the division that occurs when children have to use different equipment depending on their ability is the cause of a negative emotion linked to disability. Burke’s research can be applied to the ideal, typical elementary school classroom by understanding that playing together is more important to children than differences of capabilities. Accessible technology or structures must be coupled with education about the history of disability advocacy. Steps toward inclusion could include playing games that are accessible to everyone during recess, after/before school, or for physical education. Correspondingly, that not being able to play together can create a negative connotation with (dis)abilities (Burke, 2006). Deleuzoguattarian assemblage analysis takes into account each component of the whole system and does not assign full responsibility to one part but instead looks to improve the relationship between the parts these include discursive conversation of the issue, biological, discursive, technological, and economic. Built structures send spatial messages about who is in and out of place. When we keep children with (dis)abilities separated it teaches “abled” children that their world functions without people with (dis)abilities. These are covert conditionings that stall the movement toward accessibility. In this movement, architecture becomes an incredibly powerful tool as both a way to examine the dominant ideology, and also, as an opportunity to shape an ideological shift. When teaching methods and use of space are updated, the classroom becomes a space for transformation. Due to the beautiful and intricate relationship of architecture and ideology, the elementary school classroom can change the future. Now in my Master's degree in my program at Columbia University, we’re taught to practice conflict mapping using systems theory. When we place Institutional Ableism at the center of the map, accessibility movements and all the past advocacy inhibit it, while ignorance due to lack of education and experience enable this intractable conflict.

Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) techniques can be used to facilitate shared meaning of disability and accessibility. Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) has powerful implications in the workplace for understanding the experience of employees with disabilities. The understanding CMM fosters is through narratives, influences and operating forces. Through my CMMI Fellowship, I am currently developing a framework that will be used for organizational change consulting to walk participants through the SEAVA process and facilitate conversations about disability. Co-Create with CMM “In this space of both reflection and agency, afforded by the CMM tools, each party can understand the other in a deeper way and together determine a pathway forward.” An extraordinary aspect of CMM is that the variety of techniques grounds the parties in the present as they navigate through the past. This approach allows participants to discover both themselves and each other. The discovery is characterized by each person sharing their reality of the episode. In this space of both reflection and agency, afforded by the CMM tools, each party can understand the other in a deeper way and together determine a pathway forward. Therefore, CMM can be used to facilitate conversations about disability and foster a powerful internal shift. Conflict resolution framework combines with CMM In the movement toward #accessibility in the workplace, there are many absent conversations regarding the social experience of accommodations. More specifically, those wanting to have these conversations may feel silenced due to the unique combination of power, (defined in the formal sense of status due to organizational roles) dependency, (benefits from the job and/or accommodations to do their job), and dynamic (collaborative or competitive), as laid out in the situated model of conflict (Coleman et. al., 2012). These social dynamics inhibit conversations meaning that people can continue to operate unaware of how their actions impact employees with a #disability. Personal Experiences “I discover the many narratives which I carry with me impacting my communication.” I have a personal connection to this goal because I have experienced a variety of issues in the workplace related to #accommodations. For example, supervisors storing items on my assistive furniture, assigning me tasks without being aware of my accommodation plan, or requesting me to move my furniture to different buildings on my own. Furthermore, gaps in #communication from Human Resources about workplace accommodations compound the issue. When I consider my response, I discover the many #narratives which I carry with me impacting my communication. Participating in this discovery process with others in the workplace could create a powerful shift fostering a deeper understanding of disability. Application The situated model of conflict applied to this context highlights that an entry level employee with a disability may experience a difficult time speaking up due to the level of power, dependency, and dynamic of the #relationship between parties. If left unaddressed, the hidden issues can lead the employee to disengage, isolate, or lose their sense of agency; all of which are compounded by the experience of their condition in relation to social participation. Due to this link, these instances of potential conversation around issues related to their work accommodations can be especially transformative if they have the right tools and resources to respond, or particularly harmful if they don’t. The SEAVA process in CMM Solutions: Field Guide for Consultants teaches the application of a comprehensive combination of CMM tools (Sostrin et. al., 2012). By using the complete #SEAVA method, each tool weaves into the next, walking the participants through a journey to ultimate transformation, if the parties choose. For example, the Daisy Model can highlight the influences each party brings to the conflict (Pearce et. al., 1999). Furthermore, the #LUUUUTT model can unearth vital wisdom of all involved including organizations; the many stories unheard, unknown, and often even untellable (Jensen et. al., 2018). As in the Field Guide, I too want to develop a framework which incorporates CMM tools through the SEAVA process to provide a cumulative experience for the impacted parties. Therefore... This targeted form of workplace consultancy is important because a better work environment results from people feeling that they can express and #co-create shared meaning. When employees are settled, feel safe, and have the support they need, they are able to contribute dedication, passion, and ease to the workplace. When people have the communication tools they need, they can create a better social world by opening the lines of expression and understanding. These actions then expand out to impact the work culture as a whole supporting #inclusion and #belonging. In Conclusion... In conclusion, I believe the scholar practitioner method of applying #CMM frameworks to the organizational setting will be extremely beneficial. It will open barriers to participation thus allowing employees with disabilities more opportunities to contribute to life in a meaningful way. The CMM tools can inform a deeper level of accessibility. Furthermore, combined with the situated model of conflict can also highlight the unseen social forces such as pressure and dependency which influence communication and how they specifically impact an employee with a disability. References Coleman, P. T., Kugler, K. G., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., Nowak, A., & Vallacher. R. (2012). Getting down to basics: A situated model of conflict in social relations. Negotiation Journal, 28(1), 7-43. Jensen, A., Penman, R. (2018). CMM: A brief overview. https://cmminstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/65_CMM-BriefOverview.2018.pdf Pearce, W. Barnett (1999). Using CMM: The Coordinated Management of Meaning. A Pearce Associates Seminar. Sostrin, J., Pearce, B., & Pearce, K. (2012). CMM Solutions: Field Guide for Consultants, 2nd Edition. Lulu.com. ISBN: 97880557995592.

The importance of elevating the voices of the disabled in rural Guatemala through qualitative research. Disability studies can be understood as a conversation that begins with personal narratives. When conducting research of a community experiencing compounded marginalization (rural, poor, disabled), it is necessary to allow the personal narrative discourse to arise from within the group and not be imposed by the outside. During my research internship with Viviendas Leon, I conducted research on disability in central America and how to create a research project that gathers the most effective data to be used to help the community. Guiding Questions What type of data gathering will create the most effective policy and implementation guidelines for the disabled population in Guatemala? Qualitative data allows for this process to occur. Though disability studies is a conversation, the most vital interlocutors of this conversation, disabled people and their families, are not included. Therefore, the policy that is currently in place does not fully represent the social difficulties that a person with disabilities confronts in their day to day life. I hope to fill a gap in research by elevating the shared experiences of those who live in rural areas of Guatemala through qualitative data. By focusing on the most underrepresented sector of the population, researchers can establish a relevant definition of disability, discover the causes, and assess their needs. Background Through Viviendas Leon, I began building a network for dispersing the interview through disability advocacy non-profits in the Lake Atitlan area of Guatemala. The project is not completed yet and there are no findings to share until I conduct the interviews. Literature Review Poverty and Disability “Disability and poverty are concomitant conditions. The cyclical relationship between these two conditions has been recognized globally, with disability increasing the risks of becoming poor and poverty increasing the risk of becoming a person with disability” (Pinilla-Roncancio, 2017, p 398). Disability is both a cause and a consequence of poverty. Another economic researcher states, “disability is both a determinant of poverty, because it lowers earning power and consumption expenditures (Haveman and Wolfe 2000; Gertler and Gruber 2002), and a consequence of poverty, because the cumulative deprivations of poverty such as inadequate infant or child development, or exposure to dangerous working conditions, can manifest themselves in disability” (Filmer, 2008, p 150). Barriers preventing education participation are the same barriers preventing work participation. Low level of education then leads to a low income. Policy Not Implemented The fact that a high amount of those in poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean are disabled suggests that ratifying the UNCRPD is not enough. Simply passing policy does not mean that it is put into practice (Perez, 2017; Dudzik, 2020). “Researchers have noted global and regional inadequacy or non-existence of policy implementation and enforcement (Dudzik, 2020).” Every research study I found discussed the lack of implementing disability policy and is therefore an agreed upon conclusion. Studies that use quantitative data have stated that the data is often old, outdated, and sparse (Filmer, 2008; Pinilla-Roncancio, 2017; Grugel, 2017; Dudzik, 2020). The lack of data makes it difficult to measure the effectiveness of policy passed. Current research about the pandemic determined that social inequities are exacerbated in the midst of a pandemic and unequal distribution of assets leads to social tension (Sakellariou, 2020). During the pandemic, or any natural disaster, those with disabilities will be some of the most vulnerable to socioeconomic tensions (Gandelman, 2018). Qualitative Research Global South Disability Studies Academic Neocolonialism is a term used to describe the fact that gathering quantitative data doesn’t take into account the context of the local population but instead uses blanket terms, concepts, theories and data gathering mechanisms that are from the Global North. Theories, definitions, and critiques of disability studies are from the Global North, while effects of colonialism and post-colonialism from the Global North have actually produced disabilities for the colonized. Meekosha identifies factors of neocolonialism generated by the Global North that create disabilities for the Global South such as nuclear testing and dumping, global arms trade, sweatshops, civil wars provoked and supported by the Global North, famine, and poverty. The culture, history, geopolitics, and even causal factors for becoming disabled are all fundamentally different in these two places. Therefore, it is inappropriate to apply the same theories. Furthermore, allowing the Global North’s disability theories to dominate and be mainstream for the rest of the world is yet another form of post-colonialism. “Theories, definitions, and critiques of disability studies are from the Global North, while effects of colonialism and postcolonialism from the Global North have actually produced disabilities for the colonized.” Methodology Through the interview that I have designed, data will measure direct physical needs that the disabled population in Guatemala have such as medical equipment, prosthetics, architectural changes, and economic support, all of which can raise the quality of life of that person or family and mitigate barriers to inclusion and participation. The interview data will also identify the culture of disability there in Guatemala. Furthermore, I anticipate learning about the causes of disabilities to measure how many are created by colonial/postcolonial processes. Through Viviendas Leon, I began building a network for dispersing the interview through disability advocacy non-profits in the Lake Atitlan area of Guatemala. The project is not completed yet and there are no findings to share until I conduct the interviews. Conclusion In conclusion, qualitative data, such as personal narratives, can benefit various aspects of the disabled population. Researchers working with this form of data have unpacked nuances, background information, and the inter relational nature of systems generating a deeper understanding about weaknesses in the current infrastructure and how those can be improved The findings from personal narrative data can form a benchmark and used to implement supports. The other incredible factor about personal narrative is that it empowers people to find their voice, share their experience, and form a community. This community can then mobilize to make positive change. The people within this community can then use the dialogue created in sharing personal narratives to give rise to a local and relevant “disability studies” academic body of literature. The entire world can then learn about the culture of disability there in Guatemala.

Eugenics: Create Outliers and then Cast them Away Eugenics “Those who aren’t able to operate well within the construct of society do not have “top” genes." Upon taking a deeper look at the motivations of society in response to those who are impaired, one can see that the second framework that is tied to unconscious ranking of valuation is the concept of eugenics. This concept states that there is a top human specimen. Supporters believe that some genes are stronger than others. This human operates profitably and richly within the bounds and norms of society. Since they operate well, they are considered to have top genes. Those who are handsome, healthy, fit, and fit into society should continue their genetic line. However, “treating health and vigor as moral virtues for everyone harms people with disabilities and illnesses” (Wendell, 2020). This treatment harms people with disabilities because it classifies them as unfit and demoralized. For example, by creating a best of the breed category, eugenics then creates another category; those who are not operating well within the bounds of society. They don’t have good genes.These are people who are not adding profit to society, they’re not fit and they’re not successful. Therefore, those who aren’t able to operate well within the construct of society do not have “top” genes. Threat to Society Eugenics then goes on to say that those with “bad” genes pose a threat to the rest of society. “Eugenics sought to improve the body politic and to relieve it of the economic and social burdens of disease and degeneracy" (Rose, 2007). It stated that those who were defective were an active weight on society. That they held society back, posed a burden, and even a threat to the rest of the population. Here we see that eugenics has placed value on human life. The greater the ability to be a productive member of society, the more one was worth. Eugenics believed that the genetic line of the defective should be ended. Doctors practiced this through sterilization, abortion, euthanization, or the death penalty. As stated by Nikolas Rose, eugenics practiced “...the prevention of those who are members of defective or inferior sub-populations from reproducing through sterilization or extermination" (Rose, 2007). There is no space for flexibility or inclusion here. Those who are not effectively creating profit and working well within society must die, as stated within the Eugenics movement. Exemplary Humans “The greater the ability to be a productive member of society, the more one was worth.” On the flip side, the genetic line of those with the top genes should be continued and exemplified through artificial insemination and reward systems. This desire is not always overt. It can happen in such delicate ways as “parental desires for a perfect child in an age of manipulated consumerism and reproductive choice” (Rose, 2007). The desire for population purification can happen on the most inherent and unconscious level, as we see with parents. One of the main defining points of rank is one’s health and one’s job. An impaired person faces a bodily barrier which then leads to social, educational, and workplace barriers. If a person is successful, they’re considered a prosperous value creator. Once again, a human’s worth is tied to their work, more specifically tied to how much profit they’re creating. We Don't Want to Be Reminded, In addition to this, much of society doesn’t want to see ill health. It reminds the population of death and pain. Things many don’t want to think about. “Suffering caused by the body, and the inability to control the body, are despised, pitied, and above all, feared. This fear, experienced individually, is also deeply embedded in our culture" (Wendell, 2020). We are taught to fear not having control, and to fear pain. Our culture does not recognize that at some point in everyone’s life, they will be impaired and reliant on others' assistance. So, instead of valuing reciprocity and various body abilities, we turn our cheek, create a divide, and exclude the impaired. The danger here is that the population is following a ranking system of and valuation of a human soul. This ranking system tells the population, some people are worth more than others. Those who are worth less, don’t need our attention, effort, money or care. They don’t need to be included. “The public world is the word of strength, the positive (valued) body, performance, and production, the able-bodied youth. Weakness, illness, rest and recovery, pain, death, and the negative (de-valued) body are private, generally hidden, and often neglected. Coming into the public world with illness, pain, or a de-valued body, we encounter resistance to mixing the two worlds; the split is vividly revealed" (Wendell, 2020). Therefore, the public doesn’t want to see illness because it reminds them of their own mortality. In Conclusion, If frameworks like this are not changed, those with limited mobility remain unable to participate in life and create profit thereby raising themselves up within this valuation system. Therefore, the structure of the system itself ensures that those with impairments will remain in the category of value takers, burdens on society, and excluded. Much of the conversation within the disabled rights community is in regard to changing structures: playgrounds, classrooms, work places, conference rooms, etc. in order to make them more accessible. The first thing that needs to be addressed is the ranking, rating, and valuation system that all are unconsciously participating in. When this is realized, underlying motivations can be changed. When underlying motivations change from work hard profit first to comfort first human life equality, then we will see greater flexibility in public and private spaces since architecture is an extension of the human mindstate.

Work Ethic: Work Hard or Go to Hell With innovation and technology that we have, with the social activists and widespread communication that we have, why is exclusion of those with limited mobility disabilities still so prevalent? Something is happening on a deeper, internal level. An inner ranking system. There are two main theoretical frameworks that lend a hand to delving deeper and fully understanding why exclusion is happening in relation to a ranking system. These two frameworks are the Protestant work ethic and eugenics. Therefore, by understanding these two theoretical constructions one can understand a ranking system that is taking place subconsciously which acts as a barrier to embracing those with limited mobility. Work Ethic: Work Hard or Go to Hell “The worker who was more efficiently producing products was considered closer to God than a worker who was not.” The workplace has adopted ideologies. What once was God’s law, has now become secularized and omnipresent. According to a variety of religions, God gave a commandment to work. This work was linked to divine glory, and was a religious duty. It held with it such high stakes as being allowed into heaven or not. Improvement in production served the common good and was considered Godly. Therefore, the worker who was more efficiently producing products was considered closer to God than a worker who was not. These ideologies are so deeply intertwined into our thoughts and internal ranking system. Therefore, since these ideologies are intertwined they happen on their own at a level that we are largely unaware of. No Pain, No Gain The idea that work needs to be hard; “no pain, no gain” is also related to this framework. “Loss of time through sociability...is worthy of absolute moral condemnation” (Weber, 2013). Enjoying work, or working comfortably then wasn’t work at all but something that would send you to hell. The thought then follows, if you are in an alternate physical position putting your comfort first, then you are not working hard enough. Therefore you are immoral and not worth God’s grace; morally condemned. Idle Time, “Each and every minute you devote to work, brings you closer to God.” The idea that work must be constant is also related to this framework. In regard to work, Max Weber states, “it is infinitely valuable because every hour lost is lost to labour for the glory of God” (Weber, 2013). Each and every minute you devote to work, brings you closer to God. All time must be devoted to hard work and hard labor. This statement implies that if you take even a minute off, you have lost God for that amount of time. In Conclusion, This framework has huge psychological implications. This way of understanding work is deeply ingrained in all of us. So deeply ingrained, that we don’t realize when we are creating value judgements with such voracity as moral condemnation. Therefore, the piece of the iceberg that is visible above the surface may say “I want inclusivity”, but the grand piece of the iceberg below the surface is saying “labor must be constant and hard, labor must come as first priority not you and not your comfort.” This presents a barrier to embracing those who need unique structures in order to work productively. This barrier thereby creates poverty and a disabling society.