Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site frog.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!tdh
From: tdh@frog.UUCP (T. Dave Hudson)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: starvation and freedom
Message-ID: <130@frog.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 8-Nov-84 18:54:22 EST
Article-I.D.: frog.130
Posted: Thu Nov  8 18:54:22 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Nov-84 07:25:30 EST
References: <463@wucs.UUCP>
Organization: Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA
Lines: 41

>>I have, of course, exaggerated here to make a point: it is difficult,
>>probably impossible, to measure the "net gain" or "net loss" of freedom.

>Then it is also impossible to say that such govt. activity would lower
>freedom. ...

It is typical of the mathematical but pseudo-scientific approach taken by
many economists and their followers that measurement is confounded with
evaluation.  I can say that this light is brighter than that light without
being able to measure either the brightness of either or the difference
between the brightnesses of both.  But in case one is willing to argue that
a crude form of measurement is being used in making that judgement, there
are numerous examples where a comparison is made without measurement being
involved.

Suppose we have two things.  One, Y, has qualities A, B, and C.  The other,
Z, has quality A.  These are to be evaluated against X-ness, a quality
composed of qualities A, B, C, and D.  It can clearly be said that Z has
less X-ness than Y.  But these things do not involve comparable quantities
of any kind.  In fact, since B and C have no common unit of measurement,
it is not possible to measure the net gain (assuming the qualities are
viewed as being positive) from Z to Y, or the net loss from Y to Z, despite
that the net can be qualitatively expressed, perhaps in a form that does
employ quantities.  The gain or loss can also be subjectively summarized
by such as "much" better or worse, if the values of the viewer are
understood to be the basis of evaluation, in the same manner as the
difference is viewed as being a gain or loss (in other than in a purely
arbitrary sense) in the first place.

The implications of this kind of problem for economics are sweeping, for
a radical element of subjectivity is involved in every human choice, not
only in relating the Bs and Cs with respect to one person, but also in
relating the As of B's and C's.  The things to be chosen among have some
objective existence, but the means of choosing among them is necessarily
in part subjective.  This fact is too often overlooked, leading to the
hilarious but painfully common spectacle of "subjective conclusions
parading as objectivity".

						David Hudson

Death to utils!