Not Everything that is Important is Measurable
3682
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-3682,single-format-standard,bridge-core-3.0.1,qode-page-transition-enabled,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode_grid_1400,qode-theme-ver-29.4,qode-theme-bridge,disabled_footer_bottom,qode_header_in_grid,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-7.9,vc_responsive

Not Everything that is Important is Measurable

13 Jan Not Everything that is Important is Measurable

Posted at 17:54h in I Like This, Psychology of Becoming by

Straightforward and important article. I recommend it!

A Cure for Our Fixation on Metrics

is an essay from The Wall Street Journal by Professor Jerry Muller, adapted from his new book, The Tyranny of Metrics.

Muller says:

With measurement as with everything else, recognizing limits is often the beginning of wisdom. Not all problems are soluble, and even fewer are soluble by metrics. It’s not true, as too many people now believe, that everything can be improved by measurement, or that everything that can be measured can be improved.

 

 

Tags:
, ,
Print page
8 Comments
  • loisholzman
    Posted at 20:22h, 14 January

    So glad I did, Carolina!

  • Carolina Ruesga
    Posted at 18:53h, 14 January

    This is just what I needed! Thanks for sharing Lois!!!

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 01:21h, 14 January

    Exactly. Metrics create an aggregate, which is not a person but numerical values from measurements of X number of persons. )See my chapter on psychology and the individual in Unscientific Psychology and the fuller discussion in Danziger’s Constructing the Subject.

  • Dr. Lonny Douglas Meinecke
    Posted at 23:15h, 13 January

    Thanks Lois – “The imaginary person is an aggregate so I’m loath to call it a person”. How can an aggregate be an individual? When my daughter was just becoming a person, we used to delight in her being something unpredictable each day. She, in turn, exhibited delight at us, for noticing.
    –Lonny

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 22:09h, 13 January

    Thanks, Lonny—interesting! The imaginary person is an aggregate so I’m loath to call it a person.

  • Dr. Lonny Douglas Meinecke
    Posted at 20:55h, 13 January

    This is such a nice thing to share Lois – it’s also a big topic at division 24 of the APA. How can we be so concerned with numbers? While we measure people so carefully, we watch the fading of a fundamental regard for children – into a set of standards children are afraid they won’t measure up to.

    But really, isn’t a metric an imaginary center of an imaginary person? And everybody varies a little from that thing none of us can ever be? Do we really want two of the best thing? Metrics help us shoot for an ideal, but each human should be a one of a kind masterpiece – not like the production of lots of ideal humans, none of whom varies from a standard. One Mona Lisa is awesome; two is bewildering. This is neat – thank you!

  • loisholzman
    Posted at 18:02h, 13 January

    Thanks for reading and commenting, Stan.

  • Stanley Krippner
    Posted at 17:57h, 13 January

    You are right, Lois. The equatin is faulty on both ends.

Post A Comment