Talk:Division of labour/Archives/2016
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Makes no sense
Hi. I can't make head or tail of this sentence: "Because of the large amount of labour saved by giving workers specialised tasks in Industrial Revolution-era factories, classical economists such as Adam Smith and mechanical engineers such as Charles Babbage were proponents of division of labour." Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
"The division of labour is the separation of tasks in any economic system "
Every society has a DoL but not every society has or is an economic system. You want to use another term like social system or society. Economic is a term that belongs to industrial society/capitalist society — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.88.181 (talk) 19:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
merge in Specialization (functional)
discussion goes here -- SheeEttin (talk) 16:44, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- No. This term is too well established to not have it's own article.Phmoreno (talk) 02:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
- No - the specialization (function) has a wider scope than just labor. Also Economic specialization already redirects here. Jonpatterns (talk) 11:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
It seems to me that the "division of labor" is not exactly the same thing as "specialization" in economics with the former being a richer and more complex idea. In particular, the division of labor embraces the combination of many specialized assets of different kinds to produce a single product or set of products (as with the construction of a ship in Adam Smith's account). Temple Bayliss (talk) 10:50, 6 July 2016 (UTC)