3 ms·

I do not disagree that income inequality is objectively measurable. My point is your choice of whom to include for comparison (e.g. US inequality is very diffe

I do not disagree that income inequality is objectively measurable. My point is your choice of whom to include for comparison (e.g. US inequality is very different than comparing US vs Yemen inequality. Moreover, low inequality with everyone below the poverty line may not be preferred to higher inequality but everyone above the poverty line. These are all personal, philosophical decisions - there is no objective right or wrong. My point in suggesting metrics is they force you to think about what is important and to look for data to measure it. This helps to mitigate the "I feel bad..." scenario that could simply the be the result of negative press cycles. For clarity, I agree with you that there is no escape from the subjectivity trap as only you can declare what is important to you and your view how society/the world should work.

kelseyfrog 4y ago
> My point in suggesting metrics is they force you to think about what is important and to look for data to measure it. This helps to mitigate the "I feel bad..." scenario that could simply the be the result of negative press cycles. Agreed. But, I'm not even sure the "I feel bad" part is outside the realm of examination. I'll make a point (poorly) that there is some innate "fairness" heuristic that we share with our close relatives[1], especially those that are highly social. Even if we're, on paper, "objectively" better off, if that "fairness" heuristic doesn't agree with reality then we risk social instability - that the heuristic if left unchecks results in unrest, violence, and revolt. Do we have an responsibility to oblige these instincts even if they are irrational? What if not doing so results in real negative consequences? 1. The video where one monkey gets cucumber and the other grapes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_9RjDqJ7Zs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_9RjDqJ7Zs

kelseyfrog 4y ago

> My point in suggesting metrics is they force you to think about what is important and to look for data to measure it. This helps to mitigate the "I feel bad..." scenario that could simply the be the result of negative press cycles. Agreed. But, I'm not even sure the "I feel bad" part is outside the realm of examination. I'll make a point (poorly) that there is some innate "fairness" heuristic that we share with our close relatives[1], especially those that are highly social. Even if we're, on paper, "objectively" better off, if that "fairness" heuristic doesn't agree with reality then we risk social instability - that the heuristic if left unchecks results in unrest, violence, and revolt. Do we have an responsibility to oblige these instincts even if they are irrational? What if not doing so results in real negative consequences? 1. The video where one monkey gets cucumber and the other grapes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_9RjDqJ7Zs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_9RjDqJ7Zs