Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On this question of subjectivity: I wouldn't want to say that science can't measure subjective states. The problem with the study is that it depend on self-reporting of happiness (as opposed to objective indications of happiness). Nevertheless the core of your complaint still stands. The study simply doesn't do what the anti-feminists want it to do.
BTW: Here is a quote from the report itself that is significant for this thread:
"It has been recognized that an individual's assessment of their well-being may reflect the social desirability of responses and Kahneman (1999) argues that people in good circumstances may be hedonically better off than people in worse circumstances, yet they may require more to declare themselves happy. In the context of the finding presented in this paper, women may now feel more comfortable being honest about their true happiness and have thus deflated their previously inflated responses. Or, as in Kahneman's example, the increased opportunities available to women may have increased what women require to declare themselves happy." (Page 29 of: The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness )
Given this phenomena in human psychology, it could be that (oddly enough) the decline of self-reported happiness could actually be an indication that feminism is succeeding in making women better off.
My hope is that this point (made not just by me, but by the authors of the report we are discussing) will be acknowledged and explicitly addressed, rather than simply ignored and buried under a mountain of hand-waving dismissals.
This has been mentioned about two or three times in the thread.
If according to Kahneman's theory women with more opportunities are less happy because of increased expectations from life you'll expect that effect to vary according to social status. But as the authors say, you don't find that pattern.
This has been mentioned about two or three times in the thread.
If according to Kahneman's theory women with more opportunities are less happy because of increased expectations from life you'll expect some dose-response effect according to social status. But as the authors say, you don't find that pattern.
"The analysis does not conclude why women's happiness has declined, but it doesn't rule out, among other reasons, whether more opportunities to succeed have increased a woman's expectations of herself, or whether the pressures of modern life have come at the cost of her happiness"
It's a 50+ page thread. If one poster wants to make a vague point about another poster's answer being answered (which, it wasn't) in previous pages, it is helpful for them to link up to that answer instead of making people search through a bunch of pages. The only insult is to Ringo's time since it's being wasted without specifics.
No, it's valid to point out that if a poster wants to be understood, it's upon them to source the actual thing they are quoting and not send other readers on a goose chase.
This has been mentioned about two or three times in the thread.
If according to Kahneman's theory women with more opportunities are less happy because...
And there is exactly where people keep running off the tracks. If Kahneman is offering a correct analysis of a psychological phenomenon, then the self-reporting is the problem. It's not that women "are less happy" - it is that women could be, objectively, happier but their self-reporting is deflated. As I said, self-reporting is the culprit here.
Overall, I'm not saying that women are, in fact, happier by any objective measure. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. My point is that, either way, it is wildly unconvincing to conclude (on the basis of this study) that "feminism has failed". I'm still waiting for some references to the other evidence and lines of argument for the alleged failure of feminism that are supposedly floating around somewhere in the bowels of this thread.
Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 06-21-2017 at 01:53 PM..
"The analysis does not conclude why women's happiness has declined, but it doesn't rule out, among other reasons, whether more opportunities to succeed have increased a woman's expectations of herself, or whether the pressures of modern life have come at the cost of her happiness"
From your video....not ruled out.
If you're familiar with peer reviewed literature, you'll know what scholarly platonisms like this mean. It's basically a formality for saying, "we believe our study findings are statistically significant, but don't rule out the possibility that other studies can find contradictory findings".
No, it's valid to point out that if a poster wants to be understood, it's upon them to source the actual thing they are quoting and not send other readers on a goose chase.
If you're familiar with peer reviewed literature, you'll know what scholarly platonisms like this mean. It's basically a formality for saying, "we believe our study findings are statistically significant, but don't rule out the possibility that other studies can find contradictory findings".
Without a definitive WHY being proposed in response to the findings, the conclusions can be drawn in a number of ways. All we have here is "Hey, women are self-reporting being less happy" without them conclusively saying WHY this is happening, to any satisfactory degree. They did have some thoughts in the discussion at the end, but nothing that would support the theories and proposed solutions being presented in this thread.
And there is exactly where people keep running off the tracks. If Kahneman is offering a correct analysis of a psychological phenomenon, then the self-reporting is the problem. It's not that women are "less happy" - it is that women are, objectively, happier but their self-reporting is deflated. By objective measures of happiness, they might actually be happier and this would be because they are, objectively, better off. As I said, self-reporting is the culprit here.
Overall, I'm not saying that women are, in fact, happier by any objective measure. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. My point is that, either way, it is wildly unconvincing to conclude (on the basis of this "evidence") that this is evidence that "feminism has failed". I'm still waiting for some references to the other evidence and lines of argument that are supposedly floating somewhere in the bowels of this thread.
This would still show up in the same way.
If the Kahneman effect is big enough to skew the data, you'd see some kind of variation according to social status.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
