A New Year’s Resolution

Finito World

This isn’t a magazine dedicated to philosophy, but as 2025 kicks into gear there is no harm in considering the work of Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772). Swedenborg’s work continues to attract a small but dedicated following across the globe.

The Swedish philosopher’s contemporaries knew him as a scientist, who made remarkable early predictions of the double helix structure of the gene, and described the function of the neuron well before his time. He also produced early prototypes of a flying machine and a submarine – among many other things.

But he is known now most of all for his theological work, especially Heaven and Hell (1758) which provides a description of what he calls a Heaven of Use. In short he states that everything  – and therefore everybody – has been created for a reason. Our goal as human beings, it might be said, is to discover what another philosopher Wilson Van Dusen called ‘the gentle root of one’s existence.’

This is a very interesting question to ask oneself in respect of our careers, and in respect of our lives. What am I really created to do? To the frustration of many career-seekers, this can often be easier to discover in others than in oneself. This in turn is part of the power of mentorship: to shine a light on us which we can’t quite angle rightly towards ourselves.

Usually when somebody is discussing what they love, their voice becomes tender, and their expression changes. We all know the music-lover is different when they discuss music; the film-lover will gesticulate passionately when the Oscar nominations are talked about; and the born entrepreneur will be unusually animated when the conversation comes round to Elon Musk.

Yet despite the fact that the signals can often be reasonably clear, there are a remarkable number of people out there who don’t follow their passion. Sometimes this can be a question of sincerity: they never went inwards sufficiently really to ask themselves what usefulness might mean in their case.

In other instances, people are aware of what they love but the notion of doing it for a living seems almost too good to be true. They don’t pursue it out of some strange inner tendency to stymie themselves.

It is for this reason that Baroness Nicky Morgan when she was Education Secretary during the Cameron administration placed such emphasis on resilience. Sometimes, we can be strangely circumspect about what we love, and part of education should be to toughen ourselves mentally against the naysayers within as well those without.

And yet the real point of Swedenborg’s theory of use is that it needn’t always be glamorous. There is pleasure to be had in fulfilling a humble function. In fact banal tasks can be a good place to start in terms of performing use: clearing our work space, going through our emails, being sure to respond in timely and thorough fashion.

This might be why Morgan at a recent Finito event emphasised the importance of curiosity when it comes to our roles. How much better would the world have been had, say, Justin Welby performed his tasks with more thoroughness? How much better would it have been had Paula Vennells investigated with a real sense of her use what came across her desk?

It is a small point in the scheme of things but in each instance it would have been better not just for the victims but for Welby and Vennells too. We have all had to face up to the reality that the Archbishop Canterbury felt the appearance of his function was more important than the function itself.

Of course, all this works too at the political level. Democratic elections bequeath mandates and it is wise to see these as permission to conduct use. Too often hyperactive politicians go outside their mandate; when they do so it might be said they are breaching the laws of use.

We have seen in the past few months two clear examples of this. I can’t remember Donald Trump mentioning the potential American acquisition of Greenland with much volubility on the 2024 campaign trail. It took the presidential transition for that topic to come up.

Similarly, the Starmer administration is equally culpable when it comes to tax. Here again, the sudden post-election discovery of a so-called ‘black hole’ in the public finances led to large National Insurance rises on employers. Again, all this materialised as a prospect after and not before the election. This will mean that as the cost of borrowing escalates, and fiscal rules are inevitably broken, the electorate will be less likely to give the Chancellor Rachel Reeves the benefit of the doubt. She has violated the doctrine of uses.

The truth can sometimes be better, though often a bit more prosaic, than human beings tend to make it. Many human beings are very resourceful and smart: most likely the job in front of you at the moment is one you can do very well – and better than you could imagine if you were to give it your full respect and attention. But human beings also dream outside their scope – and insodoing limit their effectiveness.

To be quietly useful is therefore as good a New Year’s Resolution as any. Besides, not to be useful can come back to you quicker than you may imagine, as Reeves and Trump may well discover.