Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
The professions, conceived as a select body of superior occupations, have existed from time immemorial, although their identity has often been in dispute. The ancients wrote and argued about them, while Herbert Spencer traced their origin among primitive peoples. The earliest view to which we need here pay attention was that occupations should be judged and valued according to their compatibility with the good life. They were to be tested by their effect on the giver of the service rather than on the recipient. The professions were, in English parlance, the occupations suitable for a gentleman. This idea naturally flourished in societies which distinguished sharply between life lived as an end in itself, and life passed in pursuit of the means which enable others to live as free civilized men should. The professions in such a society were those means to living which were most innocuous, in that they did not dull the brain, like manual labour, nor corrupt the soul, like commerce. They even contained within themselves qualities and virtues which might well find a place among the ends of the good life itself. Leisure, based on the ownership of land or of slaves, was the chief mark of aristocracy, and here too the professions were but slightly inferior. For leisure does not mean idleness. It means the freedom to choose your activities according to your own preferences and your own standards of what is best. The professions, it was said, enjoyed this kind of freedom, not so much because they were free from the control of an employer—that was assumed—but rather because, for them, choice was not restricted and confined by economic pressure. The professional man, it has been said, does not work in order to be paid: he is paid in order that he may work. Every decision he takes in the course of his career is based on his sense of what is right, not on his estimate of what is profitable. That, at least, is the impression he would like to create when defending his claim to superior status.
1 See, for example, Neurath, Otto, “Zur Anschauung der Antike über Handel, Gewerbe und Landwirtschaft” (Jahrbücher für National-ökonomie und Statistik, Jena, vol. LXXXVII, 1906, p. 577).Google Scholar
2 The Principles of Sociology (London, 1896), vol. III, part vii.Google Scholar
3 An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (ed. Cannan, Edwin, ed. 5, London, 1930), vol. I, p. 107.Google Scholar
4 See Durant, H. V., The Problem of Leisure (London, 1938), chap. i.Google Scholar
5 Carr-Saunders, A. M. and Wilson, P. A., The Professions (Oxford, 1933), p. 71.Google Scholar
6 Durran, William, The Lawyer, Our Old-man-of-the-sea (London, 1913), p. 50.Google Scholar
7 “The Decline of the Professions” (Harper's Monthly Magazine, Nov., 1935, pp. 656–7).Google Scholar
8 British Medical Journal, supplement, Aug. 13, 1938, p. 367.Google Scholar
9 “The Decline of the Professions,” p. 684.
10 The British Civil Servant (ed. Robson, W. A., London, 1937), p. 19.Google Scholar
11 Summary of the terms of reference of the Royal Commission on the Distribution of the Industrial Population, set up in July, 1937.
12 Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Ministry of Health for 1937 (London, 1938), p. 1.Google Scholar
13 British Medical Journal, supplement, Aug. 13, 1938, p. 368.Google Scholar
14 Ibid., July 23, 1938, p. 163.
15 See the pamphlet with this title published by the Association in 1938.
16 “Medical Progress and Society” (Human Affairs, ed. Cattell, R. B., Cohen, J., and Travers, R. M. W., London, 1937, pp. 125–6).Google Scholar
17 The Theory of Business Enterprise (New York, 1904), p. 51 Google Scholar, and The Engineers and the Price System (New York, 1921), p. 75.Google Scholar
18 Dorfman, Joseph, Thorstein Veblen and His America (New York, 1934), p. 491.Google Scholar