The Great Folly of Quantifying Happiness
ONO Goro / Professor Emeritus, Saitama University
July 5, 2010
A decade into the 21st century and developed countries are still constricted by a sense of stagnation. Today there is a growing movement among them to adopt "happiness" as an alternative to "economics," an indicator that has reached a dead end.
It goes without saying that the ultimate purpose of life lies in attaining happiness. However, once we start treating happiness as an indicator equivalent to economic values, it is transformed into something totally alien from the ultimate happiness we seek. After all, happiness and satisfaction are essentially qualitative, and do not adapt well to quantification. And precisely for that reason, economists have recognized that "utility could not be measured", and have kept these values apart from monetary values that are quantifiable.
There was a time when the Japanese government sought to turn the level of "comfortable living" in each prefecture into an indicator by compiling the rate of achievement for a broad range of criteria. Surprisingly, the results showed that prefectures that were farthest from the metropolitan area scored the highest in living comforts, while prefectures within the metropolitan area scored the lowest. In a country like Japan, where freedom of movement is ensured, this should have led to a move out of "uncomfortable" prefectures into "comfortable" prefectures. But in reality, the former regions have become over-populated and the latter regions under-populated, reflecting the people's preference for the convenience of daily life. The reason for this disparity between indicator and actual population movement lies in the fact that the attainment of this type of desire is only a relative matter, as opposed to being an absolute must.
Let's look at this in light of the "Happiness Formula" derived from Buddhist philosophy: "Happiness＝Fulfillment of Desire＝Desire Fulfilled÷Expected Total of Desires." According to this formula, you don't necessarily need to expand the numerator "Desire Fulfilled" to attain happiness. You can just as well take the ascetic path and reduce the denominator "Expected Total of Desires." Conversely, you will never be able to attain happiness if you continue to create new desires the way modern capitalism does, for example.
To begin with, Total Welfare consists of a mixture of elements that are easily quantified, such as economics, and elements that are impossible to quantify, such as the warmth provided by a family. Take a society suffering from severe poverty, where hunger is the norm and the level of hygiene is low, and where people have no access to education or information that constitute the minimal requirements for survival. In such a society, an expansion in economic welfare has the effect of improving non-economic welfare as well, so the two are in correlation. However, once the economic aspects of a society develop to a certain point, further expansion in economic welfare will result in a deterioration in non-economic welfare, such as pollution, overcrowding and alienation, and the two lapse into an inverse correlation. Therefore, "Happiness＝Total Welfare" reaches its peak when the sum of economic welfare and non-economic welfare is at a maximum. For developed countries that have passed this peak, it is obvious that a continuous pursuit of the growth path would actually reduce the Total Welfare.
Nevertheless, the world as a whole remains gripped by the trend of pursuing economic welfare. Even developed countries that have begun to question economic welfare are seeking to quantify happiness. This is because globalization has given rise to the need for countries and ethnic groups with diverse value systems to coexist along a single axis. For people with conflicting values to coexist within a single sphere, we must develop something of a common set of values. This is how easily quantifiable values that can be misconstrued as objective, and economic values in particular, were given greater recognition than their actual worth. The prime example is America, a "melting pot of races" where diverse value systems exist within the country. In America, economic values have long been emphasized as the common value to maintain its unity as a nation. It is only natural that economic values, or values that are easily quantifiable, have gained popularity in today's world, where America holds hegemonic leadership.
In Japan's general elections held last summer, victory went to the Democratic Party, which had made a point of not featuring economic growth policies in its manifesto. The electoral outcome was due to the fact that the majority of voters had hung a question mark over Japan's past policy of imitating western values. However, in the course of the budget-making process that immediately followed the elections, the Democratic Party became captivated by the magic of economic values and reverted to a policy that emphasizes the economy, against the expectations of the Japanese people. This turnaround was perhaps one of the factors that led to a dramatic decline in the Party's popularity ratings and the subsequent collapse of the Hatoyama government. Having said so, it is nevertheless difficult to imagine the Democratic Party being brought down in the upcoming Upper House elections. After all, the Liberal Democratic Party and other major opposition parties are also pursuing policies that emphasize the economy after the American model.
In the course of these events, Japan has unfortunately lost an opportunity to fulfill its mission in world history, and the world has likewise closed its doors to a path that could have led to an escape from this state of confusion. Let me explain. Unlike the traditional western value system of gold worship, Japan has traditionally considered attachment to money as ignoble. Nevertheless, Japan managed to transform itself into a modern capitalist economic power through modernization that began in the Meiji period (since the restoration of Imperial rule in 1867) and Americanization that took place in the post-World War II period. And precisely for this reason, the course of Japan's second change in direction could have been an epochal experiment for mankind as a whole, confronted with the need for a radical change in values.
To summarize: while individuals are free to entertain the illusion of "money buys happiness" based on self-responsibility, national governments should not lead their people into holding such a false illusion by way of "quantifying happiness." It is a genuine act of folly that will only bring about results that are diametrically opposed to the happiness sought by their people.
The writer is Professor Emeritus at Saitama University.
It goes without saying that the ultimate purpose of life lies in attaining happiness. However, once we start treating happiness as an indicator equivalent to economic values, it is transformed into something totally alien from the ultimate happiness we seek. After all, happiness and satisfaction are essentially qualitative, and do not adapt well to quantification. And precisely for that reason, economists have recognized that "utility could not be measured", and have kept these values apart from monetary values that are quantifiable.
There was a time when the Japanese government sought to turn the level of "comfortable living" in each prefecture into an indicator by compiling the rate of achievement for a broad range of criteria. Surprisingly, the results showed that prefectures that were farthest from the metropolitan area scored the highest in living comforts, while prefectures within the metropolitan area scored the lowest. In a country like Japan, where freedom of movement is ensured, this should have led to a move out of "uncomfortable" prefectures into "comfortable" prefectures. But in reality, the former regions have become over-populated and the latter regions under-populated, reflecting the people's preference for the convenience of daily life. The reason for this disparity between indicator and actual population movement lies in the fact that the attainment of this type of desire is only a relative matter, as opposed to being an absolute must.
Let's look at this in light of the "Happiness Formula" derived from Buddhist philosophy: "Happiness＝Fulfillment of Desire＝Desire Fulfilled÷Expected Total of Desires." According to this formula, you don't necessarily need to expand the numerator "Desire Fulfilled" to attain happiness. You can just as well take the ascetic path and reduce the denominator "Expected Total of Desires." Conversely, you will never be able to attain happiness if you continue to create new desires the way modern capitalism does, for example.
To begin with, Total Welfare consists of a mixture of elements that are easily quantified, such as economics, and elements that are impossible to quantify, such as the warmth provided by a family. Take a society suffering from severe poverty, where hunger is the norm and the level of hygiene is low, and where people have no access to education or information that constitute the minimal requirements for survival. In such a society, an expansion in economic welfare has the effect of improving non-economic welfare as well, so the two are in correlation. However, once the economic aspects of a society develop to a certain point, further expansion in economic welfare will result in a deterioration in non-economic welfare, such as pollution, overcrowding and alienation, and the two lapse into an inverse correlation. Therefore, "Happiness＝Total Welfare" reaches its peak when the sum of economic welfare and non-economic welfare is at a maximum. For developed countries that have passed this peak, it is obvious that a continuous pursuit of the growth path would actually reduce the Total Welfare.
Nevertheless, the world as a whole remains gripped by the trend of pursuing economic welfare. Even developed countries that have begun to question economic welfare are seeking to quantify happiness. This is because globalization has given rise to the need for countries and ethnic groups with diverse value systems to coexist along a single axis. For people with conflicting values to coexist within a single sphere, we must develop something of a common set of values. This is how easily quantifiable values that can be misconstrued as objective, and economic values in particular, were given greater recognition than their actual worth. The prime example is America, a "melting pot of races" where diverse value systems exist within the country. In America, economic values have long been emphasized as the common value to maintain its unity as a nation. It is only natural that economic values, or values that are easily quantifiable, have gained popularity in today's world, where America holds hegemonic leadership.
In Japan's general elections held last summer, victory went to the Democratic Party, which had made a point of not featuring economic growth policies in its manifesto. The electoral outcome was due to the fact that the majority of voters had hung a question mark over Japan's past policy of imitating western values. However, in the course of the budget-making process that immediately followed the elections, the Democratic Party became captivated by the magic of economic values and reverted to a policy that emphasizes the economy, against the expectations of the Japanese people. This turnaround was perhaps one of the factors that led to a dramatic decline in the Party's popularity ratings and the subsequent collapse of the Hatoyama government. Having said so, it is nevertheless difficult to imagine the Democratic Party being brought down in the upcoming Upper House elections. After all, the Liberal Democratic Party and other major opposition parties are also pursuing policies that emphasize the economy after the American model.
In the course of these events, Japan has unfortunately lost an opportunity to fulfill its mission in world history, and the world has likewise closed its doors to a path that could have led to an escape from this state of confusion. Let me explain. Unlike the traditional western value system of gold worship, Japan has traditionally considered attachment to money as ignoble. Nevertheless, Japan managed to transform itself into a modern capitalist economic power through modernization that began in the Meiji period (since the restoration of Imperial rule in 1867) and Americanization that took place in the post-World War II period. And precisely for this reason, the course of Japan's second change in direction could have been an epochal experiment for mankind as a whole, confronted with the need for a radical change in values.
To summarize: while individuals are free to entertain the illusion of "money buys happiness" based on self-responsibility, national governments should not lead their people into holding such a false illusion by way of "quantifying happiness." It is a genuine act of folly that will only bring about results that are diametrically opposed to the happiness sought by their people.
The writer is Professor Emeritus at Saitama University.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
あまりに愚かな幸福度の数値化
小野五郎 / 埼玉大学名誉教授
2010年 7月 5日
二十一世紀に入ってからこの方閉塞感に苛まれ続けている先進国で、行き詰った経済に代わるべきものとして幸福度を取り上げようという動きが拡がっている。
元より人生の究極の目標は幸福を得ることにある。だが、幸福度を経済価値同様に指標化すれば、それは究極の目標としての幸福とは全く異質なものとなってしまう。なぜなら、幸福とか満足感は、あくまで定性的なものであり定量化には馴染まないものだからである。それゆえにこそ、経済学の世界でも「効用は不可測」だとしており、数量として扱える貨幣価値とは一線を画してきているのだ。
かつて日本政府も都道府県ごとの「住みやすさ」として、多岐にわたる設問ごとの達成度を集計し指標化したことがあった。その結果は、意外にも「最も住みやすい」のは大都市圏から離れた県で、「最も住みにくい」のは大都市圏内の県と出た。移動が自由な日本国内にあっては、「住みにくい」県から「住みやすい」県へと人口流出が起こるはずだが、現実は逆に生活面での利便性を反映して前者の方が過密で後者の方が過疎となっている。本指標の現実の動向からの乖離の原因は、この種の欲望に対する達成度が相対的なものにすぎず絶対的なものではないことにある。
これを仏教哲学から導き出された「幸せの方程式」＜幸せ＝欲望の達成度＝達成された欲望÷期待していた総欲望＞によって考察すると、幸せは何も分子の「達成された欲望」を増大せずとも、分母の「期待する総欲望」を抑えるという禁欲的手段によっても得られると分かる。逆に現代資本主義のように新たな欲望を次々と産出していけば、永遠に幸福感を達成できないことになる。
そもそも幸福感をもたらす総厚生は、経済のような数値化しやすいものと家庭内の温かみのような数値化不可能なものが入り交じって成立している。ところで、慢性的な飢餓状態で衛生面も悪く生存のために最低限必要な教育・情報も十分に得られない極貧社会では、経済厚生の増大がその他の非経済的厚生も改善するから両者は相関関係にある。しかし、経済社会がある程度まで発達すると、経済厚生の増大は公害・過密・疎外などの非経済的厚生の悪化をもたらし両者は逆相関関係に陥る。したがって、幸福感＝総厚生は、経済厚生と非経済的厚生との和が最大の時に極大に達する。当然、このピークを超えた先進諸国で成長路線を継続すれば、かえって総厚生が減少してしまうことになる。
にもかかわらず、世界全体では相変わらず経済厚生を追求しようとする傾向が強い。経済厚生に疑問を抱いている先進国にしてからが、経済に代わるものとして幸福度の数値化を図ろうとしている。その原因は、グローバリゼーションによって、同一座標上で多種多様な価値観の国家・民族の共生が求められるようになったことにある。相反する価値観を有する者同士が同一場で共生するためには、何らかの共通価値観が必要となる。そこで客観的と錯覚しやすい数値化容易なもの、特に経済価値が実勢以上に強く認識されることになった。特に、「人種のるつぼ」といわれ、国内に多種多様な価値観を抱えるアメリカでは、国家としての統一を保つために古くから経済価値が共通価値観として重用されてきた。そのアメリカが覇権国として世界をリードするようになった現代において、経済価値あるいは数値化が容易な価値がとりあえずの汎用性を持つようになったのも当然である。
昨夏の日本の総選挙では、マニフェストにあえて経済成長策を取り上げなかった民主党が勝利を収めた。それは、これまでの欧米型価値観への追随に対して、国民多数が疑問符を投げかけた結果である。しかるに、民主党は、選挙直後に始まった予算編成過程で経済価値の魔力に取り付かれてしまい、国民の期待に反して経済重視路線に回帰してしまった。そうした変節が民主党に対する支持率急低下と鳩山政権崩壊の要因の一つだと考えられる。とはいえ、今度の参院選挙において民主党が凋落するとも考えがたい。なぜなら自民党など他の主力野党にしても、アメリカ追随型経済重視路線をとっているからである。
この過程で、日本は残念ながら世界史的使命を果たす機会を失ってしまい、世界もまた混迷から脱する道を当分閉ざすことになった。すなわち、日本は、「黄金こそ神」という欧米の伝統的価値観とは異なり「金銭を卑しい」とする伝統的価値観を有しながら、なお明治以来の近代化路線さらには戦後のアメリカ化によって現代資本主義経済大国へと脱皮した。だからこそ、その再度の方向転換の行方は、価値観の大転換が迫られている現代人類にとって画期的な実験台となるべきものだったのである。
端的に言って、個々人が自己責任の上で「幸福は金で買える」と錯覚するのは勝手だが、各国政府までが「幸福度の数値化」という形でそうした錯覚を誤誘導すべきではない。それは、人々の求める幸福とは正反対の結果をもたらす、全くもって愚行である。
（筆者は埼玉大学名誉教授）
元より人生の究極の目標は幸福を得ることにある。だが、幸福度を経済価値同様に指標化すれば、それは究極の目標としての幸福とは全く異質なものとなってしまう。なぜなら、幸福とか満足感は、あくまで定性的なものであり定量化には馴染まないものだからである。それゆえにこそ、経済学の世界でも「効用は不可測」だとしており、数量として扱える貨幣価値とは一線を画してきているのだ。
かつて日本政府も都道府県ごとの「住みやすさ」として、多岐にわたる設問ごとの達成度を集計し指標化したことがあった。その結果は、意外にも「最も住みやすい」のは大都市圏から離れた県で、「最も住みにくい」のは大都市圏内の県と出た。移動が自由な日本国内にあっては、「住みにくい」県から「住みやすい」県へと人口流出が起こるはずだが、現実は逆に生活面での利便性を反映して前者の方が過密で後者の方が過疎となっている。本指標の現実の動向からの乖離の原因は、この種の欲望に対する達成度が相対的なものにすぎず絶対的なものではないことにある。
これを仏教哲学から導き出された「幸せの方程式」＜幸せ＝欲望の達成度＝達成された欲望÷期待していた総欲望＞によって考察すると、幸せは何も分子の「達成された欲望」を増大せずとも、分母の「期待する総欲望」を抑えるという禁欲的手段によっても得られると分かる。逆に現代資本主義のように新たな欲望を次々と産出していけば、永遠に幸福感を達成できないことになる。
そもそも幸福感をもたらす総厚生は、経済のような数値化しやすいものと家庭内の温かみのような数値化不可能なものが入り交じって成立している。ところで、慢性的な飢餓状態で衛生面も悪く生存のために最低限必要な教育・情報も十分に得られない極貧社会では、経済厚生の増大がその他の非経済的厚生も改善するから両者は相関関係にある。しかし、経済社会がある程度まで発達すると、経済厚生の増大は公害・過密・疎外などの非経済的厚生の悪化をもたらし両者は逆相関関係に陥る。したがって、幸福感＝総厚生は、経済厚生と非経済的厚生との和が最大の時に極大に達する。当然、このピークを超えた先進諸国で成長路線を継続すれば、かえって総厚生が減少してしまうことになる。
にもかかわらず、世界全体では相変わらず経済厚生を追求しようとする傾向が強い。経済厚生に疑問を抱いている先進国にしてからが、経済に代わるものとして幸福度の数値化を図ろうとしている。その原因は、グローバリゼーションによって、同一座標上で多種多様な価値観の国家・民族の共生が求められるようになったことにある。相反する価値観を有する者同士が同一場で共生するためには、何らかの共通価値観が必要となる。そこで客観的と錯覚しやすい数値化容易なもの、特に経済価値が実勢以上に強く認識されることになった。特に、「人種のるつぼ」といわれ、国内に多種多様な価値観を抱えるアメリカでは、国家としての統一を保つために古くから経済価値が共通価値観として重用されてきた。そのアメリカが覇権国として世界をリードするようになった現代において、経済価値あるいは数値化が容易な価値がとりあえずの汎用性を持つようになったのも当然である。
昨夏の日本の総選挙では、マニフェストにあえて経済成長策を取り上げなかった民主党が勝利を収めた。それは、これまでの欧米型価値観への追随に対して、国民多数が疑問符を投げかけた結果である。しかるに、民主党は、選挙直後に始まった予算編成過程で経済価値の魔力に取り付かれてしまい、国民の期待に反して経済重視路線に回帰してしまった。そうした変節が民主党に対する支持率急低下と鳩山政権崩壊の要因の一つだと考えられる。とはいえ、今度の参院選挙において民主党が凋落するとも考えがたい。なぜなら自民党など他の主力野党にしても、アメリカ追随型経済重視路線をとっているからである。
この過程で、日本は残念ながら世界史的使命を果たす機会を失ってしまい、世界もまた混迷から脱する道を当分閉ざすことになった。すなわち、日本は、「黄金こそ神」という欧米の伝統的価値観とは異なり「金銭を卑しい」とする伝統的価値観を有しながら、なお明治以来の近代化路線さらには戦後のアメリカ化によって現代資本主義経済大国へと脱皮した。だからこそ、その再度の方向転換の行方は、価値観の大転換が迫られている現代人類にとって画期的な実験台となるべきものだったのである。
端的に言って、個々人が自己責任の上で「幸福は金で買える」と錯覚するのは勝手だが、各国政府までが「幸福度の数値化」という形でそうした錯覚を誤誘導すべきではない。それは、人々の求める幸福とは正反対の結果をもたらす、全くもって愚行である。
（筆者は埼玉大学名誉教授）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟