Benjamin Franklin: Wealthy or Rich?
... settlers. The wealth of knowledge that the Indians hold dear are that of agriculture, instinct, fitness, and tradition, where as the Colonial settlers hold progress and industry, more material and monetary things, above everything else: for we know that you highly esteem the kind of learning taught in those colleges,…you mean to do us good by your proposal; and we thank you heartily. But you, who are wise, must know that different nations have different concepts of things; and you will therefore not take it amiss, if our ideas of this kind of education happen not to be the same with yours. We have had some experience of it... they were bad runners, ignorant of every means of living in the woods, unable to bear either cold or hunger, knew neither how to build a cabin, take a dear, or kill an enemy, were therefore neither fit for hunters, warriors, nor counselors… (Franklin [Reamrks], 2004) This difference in value of education is only one of the many differences between the two cultures. Another aspect of “wealth” in which Indians seemed to differ from the settlers, was that of oratory and courtesy. Franklin made reference to the Parliament of the settlers, and how, in their culture, one was lucky enough to get a sentence completed with out being interrupted. On the other hand, there is the Indian culture, where the best speaker has the most influence, and the one who interrupts or speaks too hastily is looked down upon. It seems that the Indians strive to be courteous rather than to be heard. Through this work Franklin states that the subjectivity of wealth depends on the culture; the Indians who up hold the values and traditions taught by their tribe are considered wealthy, whereas those in the colonial culture who have formal education, maintain an allotted amount of money, and can speak their mind even at the expense of someone else is wealthy in their cultures eyes (Franklin [Remarks], 2004). Franklin along with defining “wealth,” also was one of the best-known early propagators of work values. By using a narrator within a narrator Franklin was able to employ an elaborate framework, which allows him to present maxims or little anecdotes at different levels in order to present the reader to Franklin’s own understanding of ethical behavior. Franklin’s understanding of ethical behavior seems to stress the many concrete ideals found in the Protestant belief. “The protestant work ethic,” as defined by the Word IQ Encyclopedia, “is a biblically based teaching on the necessity of hard work, perfection, and goodness of manual labor (Farmbrough, 2000).” In the essay from Poor Richards Almanak, “The Way to Wealth,” Franklin used a fictitious editor to narrate the story of a writer who used proverbs to lead his life of “riches.” Such proverbs as “Sloth, like rust, consumes faster than labor wears; while the used key is always bright,” or, “The sleeping fox catches no poultry,” condemns the action of laziness, and empowers the act of hard work; much like the protestant proverb, “Idle hands are the devil's workshop.” This tough work regimen is the basis on which the protestant work ethic was founded (Foreman, 1996). Not only do these axioms satisfy the hard work aspect of the work ethic, but they also show the goodness of the work put forth. By working the code of ethics, the “fox” who gets up early gets the “poultry” and the “key” that never quits working stays bright. Fr...