A Quality Life, Part 1
It is often argued that quality is subjective, but I am convinced this line of thinking is wrong. I can enjoy reading trash and listening to schmaltzy music, but I don’t think that the trash is as good as Shakespeare or the schmaltz as good as Bach. I can separate quality from enjoyment.
Quantity and Quality: Objective and Subjective
It is easy to do counting, and so it is easy to find out the quantity of things. I eat so many calories, and if I eat this bar of chocolate I will have eaten so many more (and the results are fairly predictable). The quality of the chocolate is trickier. It certainly has to do with how much of what goes into it. (The proportion of cocoa butter, I am told, is quite important for chocolate.) So quantity does matter for quality — they’re not entirely separate. But the quality is trickier to count.
It is often argued that quality is subjective — that if I like a particular kind of chocolate, for example, then that is what high quality chocolate is (for me). I am convinced that this line of reasoning is wrong. I can enjoy reading trash and listening to schmaltzy music, but I don’t think that the trash is as good as Shakespeare or the schmaltz as good as Bach. I can separate quality from enjoyment.
The argument for quality being subjective is really saying that quality is the same as my enjoyment. My enjoyment is subjective, and therefore quality is subjective. The mistake is the first part of the argument: that quality is (only) enjoyment. I can recognise the difference between a good and bad wine, I can even recognise that it is far superior to beer, and still prefer to drink beer. I can recognise the extraordinary quality in (some of) Picasso’s painting and still prefer something beautiful and lower quality to be hanging in my living room. (Another option is to go for Matisse — high quality and beautiful; my artistic prejudices are showing, I think.)
The argument for quality being subjective is usually the contrast with the idea of quantity being subjective. The argument is that we can all agree on counting stuff, and so quantity is taken to be objective.
This has its truth: there are aspects of reality that are readily verifiable, and these can matter a lot. A bridge needs to be able to bear a certain amount of load or the results can be fatal. A road can carry a certain amount of traffic before it is jammed full.
The problem is that ‘objective’ is then taken to mean that the matter is settled. We need a bridge of this strength, we need a road that can carry this many cars. But this is wrong. This counting doesn’t count what is destroyed by the road. It doesn’t take into account who wants the bridge and for what.
Here’s an example of what I mean. In Australia, where I’m from, the government of Queensland (one of the states of Australia) built a freeway from Brisbane, the state’s capital, to the Gold Coast. It needed to carry so many cars. And so a six-lane monstrosity was built. Why did it need to be built? So people could commute to work in Brisbane from the Gold Coast. Freeways cost millions of dollars per kilometre. The Gold Coast is about 60-80 kilometres from Brisbane. For this kind of money, the government could have equipped many thousands of people with laptops so they could work from home and ‘tele-commute’; they could have set up neighbourhood technology centres so that people could ‘tele-commute’ from these places. Thinking more creatively, they could have funded small businesses on the Gold Coast (with low interest loans — this could well have made a profit instead of costing tens of millions). All of these would have reduced the environmental and social costs of commuting.
The quality of life can be negatively affected even when the ‘objective’ numbers are quite clear.
Part 2 of this post takes a look at the risk of mixing up quantity and quality — especially when it comes to improving the quality of our lives.
Other articles by Evan Hadkins
This article was last reviewed by Dr Greg Mulhauser, Managing Editor on Tuesday, 20th January 2009. You can leave a reply below.
The URL of this page is:
http://counsellingresource.com/features/2009/01/20/a-quality-life/
21st January 2009
Hi Evan,
Interesting…
They say asking the right questions makes all the difference.
There’s a great book called Let My People Surf and he calls himself the reluctant business man. He’s the owner of Patagonia a specialized clothing store that is mainly online/mail order but has growm and has retail stores now too. He talks about asking the right questions alot.
Its funny when you get creative and think in a long range planing mode and kind of get open to fresh ideas but within governments and their base line thinking your wonderful ideas are not realistic or probable.
Great ideas yes very. This is were the quote each person can make a difference by making choices in their own lives.
I watched a great show on innovators/inventors and architects last year. This one amazingly inventive archetect built a self-sustaing small community everything was going well they were learning and being eco conscious until the building department came and all the violations were noted down. It took him ten years to get in compliance but along the way he headed up a special cause to get experimental living exceptions Permits so he could expand and do what he dreamed. It was quite a process to get governnment officials to sign off on this because so many rules were about conforming and safety. So he was an example of what your talking about but he did the daunting work to get the changes that were so important to him.
21st January 2009
Hi Diane,
If you remember the name of the architect could you send it. I’d love to know more.
Governments are quite stupid – they know the new is required but then don’t want to take any risks. They say entrepreneurs are important and then want guarantees of results. I (and many others no doubt) find this frustrating and infuriating. The only sensible way I know of to respond to this is try something so small that it is safe for the bureaucrats to ignore it. The find a way to scale it up on the basis of proven success (and expect opposition as soon as its successful). I have a good deal of experience of this process – I guess my feelings are showing.
I really like the approach of the guy who runs Patagonia. A good question can revolutionise things I think.
Thanks for your comment.
23rd January 2009
Hi Evan!
Yes! I have found the government to be frustrating at times…too.
It’s that accoutability thing! On the other side of the spectrum they are getting robbed somewhere else…in outrageous ways! Or cutting off their own headway.
I don’t remember his name but I am trying to for you. It was on the science channel so maybe I’ll scan their site and look up eco architects in New Mexico. I could paint the guy but I can’t tell you his name…go figure! Sorry!
23rd January 2009
Some of us are more visual than others (well, pretty much anyone is more visual than me).
If you find him I’d be grateful. thanks.
23rd January 2009
Hi Evan,
Movie Review: “Garbage Warrior” and Experimental Architect, Michael Reynolds
by Kimberley D. Mok, Montreal, Canada on 07. 5.08
Culture & Celebrity
It’s at Treehugger! I noticed it was on your blog roll!
You’ll love it, I think!
The website was having some tech problems or I would of shared it at your other site.
Hey now I’ll remember his name! Thanks!
Yes I am visual, that’s one of the reason why I love this architect!
Enjoy,
Diane
23rd January 2009
Many thanks.