Difference between revisions of "NOV 1"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "==16: NOV 1== ===Assigned=== :*McMahon, C6, “Lib and discontent” (331-343) :*Aspen Institute discussion of Easterlin Paradox: Wolfers, Gilbert, and Frank (about 40 minut...")
 
m
 
Line 1: Line 1:
−
==16: NOV 1==
+
==17: NOV 1 - 4. The Berlin Wisdom Paradigm==
  
 
===Assigned===
 
===Assigned===
  
−
:*McMahon, C6, “Lib and discontent” (331-343)
+
:*Hall C3, “Heart and Mind” (18)
−
:*Aspen Institute discussion of Easterlin Paradox: Wolfers, Gilbert, and Frank (about 40 minutes) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCV8IPlP-GE]
 
−
:*Clive Crook, "The Measure of Human Happiness" (3) (comments on Aspen Institute video)
 
  
−
===Aspen Institute discussion of Easterlin Paradox===
+
===Hall, Wisdom, Chapter 3 "Heart and Mind"===
  
−
:*Gilbert - people deny money buys happiness, but they often behave as if they believe it does.
+
:*Note that Hall is telling something of the "sociology of knowledge" about the rise of wisdom research.
  
−
:*'''Justin Wolfers''' - Wharton -  
+
:*Erikson -- idea of wisdom as end stage "8" of process of self-realization. A stage of development to deal with the approach of death and loss.   
−
:*Does Money buy Happiness?  States paradox controversially as, "Raising GDP does nothing for well being and we should do it."
 
−
::*Data from Gallup polls (ladder of life - best and worst life you can have) (H-L)- SWB (as life satisfaction). He uses "happy".  Log scale - Everyone agrees on this.
 
−
::*Easterlin Paradox - Characterized as three claims:
 
−
:::*1. Within societies richer people are happier (Hl) than poorer.
 
−
:::*2. Richer countries no happier than poor  (Easterlin p. 20: "Richer countries are typically happier than poorer countries"); So, when he provides data about this, he looks like he's refuting Easterlin.  -1:00 -Argh!
 
−
:::*3. As a society gets richer, it's people don't get happier (pretty rough statement here, rather polemical) Here's how Easterlin puts in p. 23 "There is no systemic relationship between the trends in happiness (Hs) and income trends."
 
−
:*Easterlin explains this by reference and relative position.  Claims the Easterlin is saying "Give up on growth" (!)
 
−
::*Argument against social comparision explanation. 
 
−
::*Claims the income threshold is $15,000.  (!)  $82K in our crash course.  Defined by Easterlin curve.  Compares Japanese, US, and European data.  Claims the Japanese survey is corrupted by changing questions.  Uses Life Satisfaction scale to explain European data.  Cheap trick.  US: Does show happiness flat.  Claims the surveys aren't capturing the rich people. 
 
−
::*Happiness rises with the log of income.  -53.00. Interprets the log issue as "Median income in US hasn't risen, so no surprise that Hs hasn't risen. 
 
−
:*Agrees that positional (relative income) does matter.  "I don't have theories, I have facts." Argh!
 
−
:*New Data on relative position: "Rich guy in poor county happier" thesis.  Claims that if this were true, we'd all move to Mexico. Argh! 
 
−
:*"New Data" on Hs: Richer countries happier (Hs) than poorer.  Not a new result! Argyle reports on this.  Not H&W news!!
 
−
:*Happiness Economics agenda isn't new.  In recession, happiness economics matches GDP focus.  True, Easterlin says this is one of the zigzags - short time intervals.  Happiness gap is narrowing for African Americans.  Probably non-economic changes.  Acknowledges that economic surveys have some subjectivity as well.  Happiness is what politicians do.   
 
  
−
:*'''Bob Frank''' - Cornell - Acknowledges that Easterlin said that about GDP, but disagrees.  Absolute income does matter.  Life expectancy, institutions better, makes sense to be in richer country. 
+
::*Interesting hypothesis in face of growth of knowledge in gerontology about decay of faculties.  (Add details from Gwande, ''Being Mortal'')
−
:*His claims: Money does buy happiness, but not as much as it could because of the way we spend it. (Consistent with Paradox.) Historical point, Smith understood non-economic factors.  Not just invisible hand.  Tversky and Khaneman - behavioral economics addresses non-rational behavior, sub-Happiness maximizing. His claim: These are minor shortfalls in our potential for happiness.
 
−
:*From Darwin.  Traits that help the individual may harm the group.  Antlers: Good for one, Dumb for all.  Individuals cant solve the problem on their own.  Brains didn't evolve for happiness.  Brains make you unhappy to motivate behaviors.  Happiness is a the fleeting state. Adaptation (say to disability) doesn't preclude us from wanting something better (mobility).
 
−
:*Hockey players and helmets.  They vote for helmet rules, but gain the advantage of not having a helmet.  Antlers again.  Not cognitive error (Behavioral econs) or lack of competition (Smith).  Collective action problem.
 
−
:*"People care about relative consumption more in some domains than others.  Leads to expenditure arms race for positional goods. These arms races take resources from non-positional goods.  Expenditure cascades.  Ex: extravagant weddings, birthday parties. -30mins
 
−
:*Bigger mansions are smart for one, dumb for all.  If everyone had bigger mansions, they would deliver less happiness.
 
−
:*plugs his 2011 book, The Darwin Economy.  recommends taxing consumption rather than income and capital gains. 
 
−
:*Bottom line: The source of market failures from positional goods and expenditure cascades can't be addressed by standard economic models (Smith or Khaneman). 
 
  
−
:*Q&A -25mins: Frank poses question about getting good education. Relative income matters alot in US.
+
:*Vivian Clayton -- reflects on family member's traits. 
−
::*McMansion problem: If it were a problem, no one would want a small house in Aspen and it would be lower priced than any house in the US.  Argh!
+
::*poses question of meaning of wisdom and relation to age. (Note descriptors.)
−
::*Frank - Responds to school example by saying we make a judgement about life trajectory that overrides short term bummer of being the average student.  Likewise for immigration.
+
::*her approach addressed a bias in geronotology toward focus on end of life.  Nothing redeeming about dying.  But maybe wisdom is.   
−
::*Neat idea that top earners in firms pay a "premium" 
+
::*Baltes - Life span developmental psychology.   
 +
::*Clayton’s approach, like Baltes, was to first read cultural literature, like the Bible, which represents wisdom in judges, but also Job.  Follow statement on p. 43. Compare to Labouvie-Vief.  Also, note from the end of the chapter about her story.  Choice, seeing wisdom easier than doing it.
  
−
===Crook, "The Measure of Human Happiness"===
+
:*Hall's account of Genesis myth: It’s not only about disobedience. Also about acquiring "original wisdom" -- wisdom as the price of seeing things clearly.  Wisdom as necessarily acquired through transgression vs. living within limits.  Also "dark wisdom".
 +
 
 +
:*In turn toward a psychological construct, initial studies on lawyers inconclusive.  Clayton’s work creates excitement, but then no funding.  She leaves academia.  Interestingly, becomes a bee keeper.
 +
 
 +
:*Example of early Berlin Paradigm research - response to vignette - 15yo preg teen. Is wisdom non-absolutist?
 +
 
 +
:*Baltes, Smith, Staudinger, Kunzemann.  -- Berlin Wisdom Paradigm -- brief overview, 49ff.  “An expert knowledge system concerning the fundamental pragmatic of life.”  Show p. 95 from next reading, Baltes and Smith, “Toward a psych of wisdom..”
 +
:*Thought of wisdom as a process, not just a personal trait.  Could be instantiated in groups, societies…
 +
:*Studied proverbs — “heuristics”
 +
 
 +
::*Note how he derived his construct and method of research.  +96
 +
:*Early critics: Carstensen and Ardelt -- felt Baltes Wisdom Paradigm (BWP) didn't focus enough on emotion. (More in Hall C4)
 +
 
 +
:*Monika Ardelt - first attempt to develop a valid wisdom rating scale.  Based on three dimensions: cognitive, reflective, and emotional.  Read p. 54.  Some anecdotes from people who got high ratings — Not necessarily highly educated, but all confronted adversity.

Latest revision as of 20:11, 1 November 2023

17: NOV 1 - 4. The Berlin Wisdom Paradigm

Assigned

  • Hall C3, “Heart and Mind” (18)

Hall, Wisdom, Chapter 3 "Heart and Mind"

  • Note that Hall is telling something of the "sociology of knowledge" about the rise of wisdom research.
  • Erikson -- idea of wisdom as end stage "8" of process of self-realization. A stage of development to deal with the approach of death and loss.
  • Interesting hypothesis in face of growth of knowledge in gerontology about decay of faculties. (Add details from Gwande, Being Mortal)
  • Vivian Clayton -- reflects on family member's traits.
  • poses question of meaning of wisdom and relation to age. (Note descriptors.)
  • her approach addressed a bias in geronotology toward focus on end of life. Nothing redeeming about dying. But maybe wisdom is.
  • Baltes - Life span developmental psychology.
  • Clayton’s approach, like Baltes, was to first read cultural literature, like the Bible, which represents wisdom in judges, but also Job. Follow statement on p. 43. Compare to Labouvie-Vief. Also, note from the end of the chapter about her story. Choice, seeing wisdom easier than doing it.
  • Hall's account of Genesis myth: It’s not only about disobedience. Also about acquiring "original wisdom" -- wisdom as the price of seeing things clearly. Wisdom as necessarily acquired through transgression vs. living within limits. Also "dark wisdom".
  • In turn toward a psychological construct, initial studies on lawyers inconclusive. Clayton’s work creates excitement, but then no funding. She leaves academia. Interestingly, becomes a bee keeper.
  • Example of early Berlin Paradigm research - response to vignette - 15yo preg teen. Is wisdom non-absolutist?
  • Baltes, Smith, Staudinger, Kunzemann. -- Berlin Wisdom Paradigm -- brief overview, 49ff. “An expert knowledge system concerning the fundamental pragmatic of life.” Show p. 95 from next reading, Baltes and Smith, “Toward a psych of wisdom..”
  • Thought of wisdom as a process, not just a personal trait. Could be instantiated in groups, societies…
  • Studied proverbs — “heuristics”
  • Note how he derived his construct and method of research. +96
  • Early critics: Carstensen and Ardelt -- felt Baltes Wisdom Paradigm (BWP) didn't focus enough on emotion. (More in Hall C4)
  • Monika Ardelt - first attempt to develop a valid wisdom rating scale. Based on three dimensions: cognitive, reflective, and emotional. Read p. 54. Some anecdotes from people who got high ratings — Not necessarily highly educated, but all confronted adversity.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.gonzaga.edu/alfino/index.php?title=NOV_1&oldid=27357"