How do we define the parameters that define a better human society for everyone?
-
This question is harder than it looks like. Is not about defining what a better society must be, but about defining parameters to later define that society. I am pretty sure most people will think with concepts like âEqualityâ, but how do you define what is âequalâ for everyone? What is the measure for equality: 50/50 %? Let´s say you are the manager of a company, you have exactly 10 employees: 7 are men and 3 are women. Some people will argue that your company is discriminating women because you have more men, that the only real proof that you are not discriminatory toward women is that you hire exactly 5 men and 5 women. I know it sound silly, it is, but that is how most people understand it. What if you have to âsplitâ it in more than 2, then 33/33/34 %? Obviously we need a set of parameters that allows us to define what Equality will be in that society. Let´s say for example that Equality for more than two parts should be reduced to the smallest possible number and the remains should go to a âsocial poolâ. Then if we got 3 parts the split will be exactly 33% each with 1% for the âsocial poolâ, whatever we decide later that pool will be... Think about government, let´s assume we have a country with 3 different cultural groups and we will elect 10 senators only. How do you decide which group will have more? If they all have exactly the same population most people will expect that they have exactly the same share of power in the government. Obviously it will be easier, in this specific case if we only have 9 senators, 3 for each one. Real life is not that easy and we will always have some minority groups. What are we going to do with those? How do we make sure everyone is represented equally? Think about these parameters a sort of "guidelines" that helps us answer many questions across a large amount of subjects. In some way standardizing our answers so we make sure that the final product (the "better society") complies with our "quality standards".
-
Answer:
A number of great philosophers, politicians and historians were developing this topic in 19th and 20th centuries. The well-known formula "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" can serve an answer to this question, if used appropriately. Unfortunately current level of the human society doesn't allow any sophisticated approach. We are not ready yet. That is why we must stick to the simple rules like equal rights and duties for all. Only when this is achieved and sustainable, we, as a society, can start with fine-tuning.
Joe Yasman at Quora Visit the source
Other answers
Universal access to education, health care and employment; transparency of government; and strict anti-corruption laws.
Kirby Doyle
Measuring economic and social progress is a hard problem, made considerably harder by the overwhelming tendency of the economic establishment to pretend that the problem doesn't exist, that protecting property rights and/or maximising GDP per capita is all that really matters, and that the numbers produced by the various departments of national statistics around the world are an appropriate guide for comparing the performance, efficiency and/or "equality" of nations, the relative wellbeing of their citizens, or soundness of their political processes. Fortunately, some of us know better, and more of us are waking up to these issues on a regular basis. I recommend reading a few of these papers to get yourself up to speed. http://www.stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/en/documents.htm Recently there have been a lot of books about "happiness", many of which probably confuse experienced and remembered happiness, the difference between which is covered in a fascinating TED talk from Daniel Kahneman:
Anonymous
"Society" is fundamentally about "enough others" with shared values or preferences getting together and agreeing to enforce them as norms. That is exactly how the parameters are chosen, with "everyone" circularly defined as "everyone who is part of the society."
Christopher Burke
Is this an April Fools joke? There are some weird assumptions here. First, why are only whole numbered percentages allowed in this utopia? If we have 9 units of some resource that need to be divided 3 ways, why can't each recipient get 3 (i.e., 1/3, or 33.333...%)? Why does more equality entail better for everyone? Why if in maximizing equality we sacrifice efficiency, and thus there are less things to be split into whole numbered percentages? What if one person works 20 hours a day and another 0, do they both deserve the same number of things? Strange description aside, this is really an ethical question more than anything. Are you a utilitarian, who feels that every action should be viewed through a lens of cost and benefit? Or perhaps a libertarian who feels that policy should maximize liberty? There is no one solution the is objectively best, or makes a better society for everyone when compared to the alternatives.
Travis Addair
Related Q & A:
- How can I get a better sleeping pattern?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How can I find a better job while I am currently working?
- How can I be a better boyfriend?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How to get a better chest quick?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
- How to get a better package from a job offer?Best solution by Quora
Just Added Q & A:
- How many active mobile subscribers are there in China?Best solution by Quora
- How to find the right vacation?Best solution by bookit.com
- How To Make Your Own Primer?Best solution by thekrazycouponlady.com
- How do you get the domain & range?Best solution by ChaCha
- How do you open pop up blockers?Best solution by Yahoo! Answers
For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.
-
Got an issue and looking for advice?
-
Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.
-
Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.
Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.