| Titre | La conceptualisation du travail, le visible et l'invisible | |
|---|---|---|
| Auteur | Yves Schwartz | |
 |
Revue | L'Homme et la société |
| Numéro | no 152-153, 2e et 3e trimestre 2004 Travail globalisé, travail singulier | |
| Page | 47-77 | |
| Résumé anglais |
Abstract
Can work be understood as one, clearly relevant parameter in historical studies ? If so, it would be necessary to provide a sufficiently unambiguous definition in order to measure its role in historical processes. However, there is a decidely obscure element which enters into all uses of the word « work ». This is clearly suggested in three « significant dead ends » : the attempt to date the « birth of work » ; the search for its « impossible meaning » ; the ambiguities in the uses of the concept of the « division of labor ». These dead ends are the result of an insufficient taking into consideration of the « invisible » dimension of work that the ergonomists help us to situate. There is, consequently, an « ergonomical » approach consisting in an attempt to consistently consider the « activity of work » when using the abstract concept of work. Source : Éditeur (via Cairn.info) |
|
| Article en ligne | http://www.cairn.info/article.php?ID_ARTICLE=LHS_152_0047 |
