posted
But it does make it difficult to discuss about in a manner that will convince other people of your opinions.
I simply don't agree that wants stay at the same levels when circumstances change. My mental states don't reflect that, and from all of the psychology I've studied, I believe mental states to be extremely malleable by both individuals themselves and society/outside influences.
Even if your mental state of wanting something stayed the same, I don't see why that should be relevant to any sort of social policy. So you (general you) happen to want an iPad exactly as much whether you have a "strong want" to fix the A/C or a "small want" to fix the A/C. So what? Maybe you're just a very wanting type of person (which most happiness research suggests is a bad thing). Interpersonal comparisons of utility just aren't that interesting for social policy - as I think Sen has demonstrated quite well in his semi-philosophy/semi-economics writings.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe in the context of the greater discussion of teacher pay and whether bright young people are unwilling to get into lower-paying jobs because they want higher incomes or not, we're talking about social policy (i.e. should teachers be given higher pay, possibly through incentive bonuses).
If you guys just want to argue that you're right and Orinico is wrong, that's cool, but that seems like an immensely boring discussion, given that we all only have our own mental states and experiences to refer to. Like I said above, it defaults to a "I'm right, you're wrong. No, I'm right and you're wrong" discussion very quickly. Carry on if you want, however.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rabbit: we can measure the fundamentally subjective question of relative want remarkably well. There's nothing surprising about being able to objectively measure fundamentally subjective things, so long as the domain has certain properties (notably, that the things to be measured manifest directly and falsifiably in behavior).
The notion of absolute want (and whether or not it "really exists", insofar as that statement makes any sense) certainly is an interesting question to tackle. It will never, however, be particularly relevant to whether or not teachers choose to enter teaching or not. Whatever someone's absolute want, entering teaching comes down to a relative choice between Teaching + teacher's salary (and the constraints associated with it) and the next best option (current job, likely) + the constraints associated with it. That's a question of relative want.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Rabbit: we can measure the fundamentally subjective question of relative want remarkably well.
Only because of the way you have defined want. Its very dangerous to define something so that you can measure.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not when you also have a strong theoretical framework that addresses why that definition is useful for understanding collective human behavior.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say it's necessary to define terms so that you can measure them. It's dangerous to assume that your term so defined encompasses the entire meaning of the word.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jhai: I believe in the context of the greater discussion of teacher pay and whether bright young people are unwilling to get into lower-paying jobs because they want higher incomes or not, we're talking about social policy (i.e. should teachers be given higher pay, possibly through incentive bonuses).
True. But no one (that I can see) has suggested that said policy changes should be related to the way those teachers choose to spend their money. That was a side discussion.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I was connecting the main discussion to the side discussion, as well as disagreeing with the concept of "want" that I saw being used. Or am I not allowed to do that?
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Excellent. Shall we see how many distinct discussions we can get going on this thread? I believe the most I've ever seen at Hatrack was four.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
My earlier mention of 60% of MA teachers burning out in two years, to be corrected by (Destineer? Too lazy to go back and check right now) is a good anecdotal example of the idea that the first claim you hear is the one you accept as true, even if its false. I heard the 60% number about 8 years ago, and have had it corrected 3-4 times since then, and STILL site that number unless I bother to go look up the true burnout rate.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
