By Eleonor Picciotto
According to Michele Lamont, Professor of Sociology at Harvard University, wondering “How do we define and attain the Good Society?” is the basic normative question college students should ask.
The Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies hosted a talk last Friday afternoon on the “Measures of our Success” to over 100 attendees.
Via a videoconference call from Paris, Jean-Paul Fitoussi, President of the Observatoire Francais des conjonctures economiques, explained how today, nations and societies look to their Gross Domestic Products, social networking and happiness ratings as determinants of success.
Fitoussi said the measures of the societies are imperfect and only partially reflect reality. “The measure of our future is the most important factor,” he said. “Health, education, security, economy and social relations determine people’s capacities of freedom.” Those factors determine the sustainability of life.
He claims that Sophists would have said, “ We want to make out GDP the measure of everything: performance, well-being and quality of life,” and says that measures of performance must be viewed with cautions.
“ I applaude people who don’t think hapiness is not measurable at all,” said Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen. He adds that sustainable objectives and measures of freedom are necessary determinants for mortality, mobidity, literacy and communication.
Sen emphazises the importance of how societies have functioned in the past. “ We have to ask ourselves: What would it be like in the future?” Sen asked. “Once we recognize we are in a crisis, give us a focus on the policies we should follow.”
As Fitoussi mentioned earlier “there is in France a debate about the debate on the question of national identity, whether if its is a positive or negative concept.” On the same line, Lamont addressed the fundamental issue of what is the true definition of a successful society.
“Individual resilience is the wear and tear of everyday lives,” said Lamont. Public policies, social inclusion as well as democratic participation, cultural membership, intergroup relation, collective action based social network, identity and hierarchy and the emphasis on capability shape the emotional and physiological responses to condition the sustainability of our societies.
Marleen de Smedt, fellow at the Weatherhead Center for International affairs at Harvard, agreed with the panel’s conclusion that “as much attention should be given to social connectedness and social relations as to the effect of the economy on the well-being and success of a society.”
In reference to ethnic boundaries, Lamont asked why does the 38% rate of HIV in Botsuana, considered as the best government in african state is higher than the 8% rate of HIV in Uganda, considered as the most corrupted african governemnt.
The answer to the difference depends on “How governements have been able to modify their population in the collective sense of who they are together” says Lamont.
“ Wealthier is Healthier,” Peter Hall, member of the Krupp Foundation and professor of European Studies said. “ The multiple dimensions of social relation includes the social resources of a society.”
Miguel Glatzer, a full-time lecturer at Umass Dartmouth, said he was amazed “how important social network and connected relations are to wel-being, independent of income and traditional definition of health care.”
The social network, the social status a person enjoys, the social hierarchy and the symbolic representation that define the purposes of a community of who belongs where are the key dimensions of life’s social relations and social ressources vary on which people draw to cope with the challenges of daily life.
He said the success of societies does not depend on how well they accumulate social ressources, but on how well ressources are distributed.“ Governments should think equally hard of the unattended effects of policy on a structure of social relation instead of focusing on the markets,” Hall said, “Just as we think about the conservation of natural ressources, we should think about the conservation of social ressources.”
The factors of GDP, happiness, social connectedness and dermining carateristics were emphasized respectively by Fitoussi, Sen, Hall and Lamont, for her to conclude that,
“ The secret of successful governements result in the choices we all make.”
Philippe J. Bernard, an utopist, President of the NGO Prospective 2100, was satisfied by the “debate that was not governmental but sociologic and economic in general.”
Martha Ferede, a Harvard Graduate, said she enjoyed the discussion after having listenned to the arguments of all participants, “”the traditional ways of measuring good societies don’t always work, but you can do something about it.” She then compared the quality of the two-hours panel to a “Chef’s top selection.”
« The Measure of Our Success: How Do We Attain the Good Society? »
Center of European Studies at Harvard University
co-written by Peter Hall and Michele Lamont
Eleonorpicciotto's Blog 