Beyond «bullshit jobs»: assessing David Graeber’s contribution to the philosophy of labor

This article presents a critical analysis of David Graeber’s concept of «bullshit jobs», evaluating its significance for the contemporary philosophy of labor. It proceeds from the hypothesis that despite the widespread media attention garnered by the American anthropologist’s bestseller, its theoretical influence has remained limited. The study reconstructs the core tenets of Graeber’s argument, exposing its methodological vulnerabilities – namely, a subjective definition of «bullshit jobs» and an unrepresentative empirical foundation. The author surveys the academic debate ignited by Graeber’s work, incorporating critiques from economists and sociologists who highlight the misalignment between his value-laden judgments and the standards of economic science. While the phenomenon of «bullshit jobs» emerges as socially perceived, Graeber’s conceptual framework is shown to lack a systematic analysis of its root causes or potential resolutions. The conclusion posits a dual role for Graeber’s book. On one hand, it fulfills a compensatory function, offering readers a way to symbolically offset the frustrations of routine work. On the other, it provides a crucial impetus for re-engaging with classic questions about the meaning of work and its transformation in the context of digitalization and unfulfilled utopian forecasts. Ultimately, the article frames Bullshit Jobs not as a rigorous theoretical model, but as a cultural artifact that captures the distinctive character of early 21st-century labor practices.