Shift to the Mechanical

I was struck by the shift I felt Wealth of Nations was making from our previous readings, moving from the individual as a thinking, reasoning creature to the individual as a tool, or even a cog, in the mechanical workings of society. This hit hardest for me around chapter 8 when Smith was discussing poverty. Smith contended that the life of poverty is much worse than a rich life, and that the division of labor helped make the wealthy life possible and better. Though I know there is a difference between a life without poverty and a life of excess, I couldn't help think of all the problems money can bring, especially with this economic crisis we are going through. I though both of the idea that 'the more money you have, the more you can lose,' in relation to the crisis, and of people who live their lives in poverty (sometimes on purpose) and have incredible, wonderfully fulfilling lives (such as Ghandi, or missionaries, etc. ). I thought the difference between these two ideas, living well rich and living well in poverty, was that Smith's living well is concerned with the human as a cog in the mechanical society, whereas living well in poverty looks at the individual as a spiritual being that does not need the productions available through the division of labour. After pondering this, I found myself stuck wondering which was more important: should we look at man like Smith, in how he fits in a society, or should we look at man as a spiritual, thinking creature as we had been doing before?