Too often calls for utopian social change serve as a device for conserving the status quo, because they pose objectives that are beyond what is feasible to implement and devalue reachable marginal improvement. As Voltaire famously remarked: ‘the best is the enemy of the good’. In this paper I suggest that being realistic about social change means seriously committing to realize it. I argue that social change should be conceived and evaluated in terms of a course of action rather than merely an ideal end-state. End-states must be assessed in conjunction with the means they require, other consequences they imply, and their likelihood of success (i.e. as a course of action). These additional three elements give rise to three distinct failures of being realistic about social change: the fanatic who does not consider the cost of means, the saint who does not consider the benefit of end-states, and the naïve who does not consider likelihood of success. Similar failures can be construed as empirical mistakes in giving the course of action due consideration: the ineffective actor (who fails to acquire available knowledge of means), the wishful thinker (whose knowledge of consequences is distorted by preferences) and the self-deceiver (whose knowledge of end-states is distorted by his preferences). Being realistic about social change – I conclude - does not mean that we should not be ambitious in what we propose, but that we should avoid these six fallacies if we truly care about realizing it.

The Good and the Best

BURELLI, CARLO
2019-01-01

Abstract

Too often calls for utopian social change serve as a device for conserving the status quo, because they pose objectives that are beyond what is feasible to implement and devalue reachable marginal improvement. As Voltaire famously remarked: ‘the best is the enemy of the good’. In this paper I suggest that being realistic about social change means seriously committing to realize it. I argue that social change should be conceived and evaluated in terms of a course of action rather than merely an ideal end-state. End-states must be assessed in conjunction with the means they require, other consequences they imply, and their likelihood of success (i.e. as a course of action). These additional three elements give rise to three distinct failures of being realistic about social change: the fanatic who does not consider the cost of means, the saint who does not consider the benefit of end-states, and the naïve who does not consider likelihood of success. Similar failures can be construed as empirical mistakes in giving the course of action due consideration: the ineffective actor (who fails to acquire available knowledge of means), the wishful thinker (whose knowledge of consequences is distorted by preferences) and the self-deceiver (whose knowledge of end-states is distorted by his preferences). Being realistic about social change – I conclude - does not mean that we should not be ambitious in what we propose, but that we should avoid these six fallacies if we truly care about realizing it.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
The_good_and_the_best._Being_realistic_a.pdf

file ad accesso aperto

Tipologia: Documento in Pre-print
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 352.87 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
352.87 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
2019 The Good and the Best (official).pdf

file disponibile solo agli amministratori

Licenza: Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione 189.99 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
189.99 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11579/100896
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact