Re: It's the metonymy, stupid! (was Re: [Pen-l] Re: De-Growth Conference Declaration)

[raghu <mraghu01@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Sandwichman <lumpoflabor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Measurement: what is measured is NOT economic growth. It is a proxy. You
> can't measure economic growth because "the economy" doesn't actually "grow".
> Any alternative index one could propose for "prosperity" or "progress" would
> meet the same objection but with the additional disadvantage of not having
> already become enshrined by usage.
>
> It's like making up a more modern, "rational" religion with more relevant
> rituals. Why bother? At least part of the appeal of religion and ritual is
> their mystery and incomprehensibility. A large part of the appeal of GDP and
> the myth of economic growth is that they exempt people from having to
> address the essential incommensurability and contentiousness of a way of
> life purportedly built on the principle of market transactions.



Excellent observations! Especially the quoted parts above which I
completely agree with and which I think articulates a sharp
disagreement with some PEN-Lers (Jim Devine) who want to keep the
monotonic growth narrative alive but with some sort of happiness index
replacing the GDP.

I can understand the attraction of the "eternal progress" narrative.
After all some things do keep expanding without limit e.g. human
knowledge, especially Science, so it is only natural that this
monotonic advance is mirrored in the real world of people and nature
in some way. At least in theory there must exist some index that
tracks this advance. I am strongly convinced that this line of
argument is wrong though I am unable to make a good philosophical
argument against it.
-raghu.


--
Do unto others BEFORE they do unto you!
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l