Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:59:36.793Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Well-Being as an Object of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Anna Alexandrova
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The burgeoning science of well-being makes no secret of being value laden: improvement of well-being is its explicit goal. But in order to achieve this goal its concepts and claims need to be value adequate; that is, they need, among other things, to adequately capture well-being. In this article I consider two ways of securing this adequacy—first, by relying on philosophical theory of prudential value and, second, by the psychometric approach. I argue that neither is fully adequate and explore an alternative. This alternative requires thorough changes in the way philosophers theorize about well-being.

Type
Everyday Concepts and Scientific Concepts
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 79 , Issue 5 , December 2012 , pp. 678 - 689
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexandrova, Anna. 2012. “Values and the Science of Well-Being: A Recipe for Mixture.” In Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science, ed. Kincaid, Harold. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. The Dappled World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisp, Roger. 2008. “Well-Being.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/well-being/.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Partha. 2001. Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diener, Ed, Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., and Griffin, S.. 1985. “The Satisfaction with Life Scale.” Journal of Personality Assessment 49:71–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diener, Ed, Lucas, Richard, Schimmack, Uli, and Helliwell, John. 2008. Well-Being for Public Policy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Douglas, Heather. 2009. Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huppert, Felicia. 2009. “Psychological Well-Being: Evidence regarding Its Causes and Consequences.” Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being 1 (2): 137–64.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel. 1999. “Objective Happiness.” In Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, ed. Kahneman, Daniel, Diener, Ed, and Schwarz, Norbert, 3–25. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Kincaid, Harold, Dupré, John, and Wylie, Alison, eds. 2007. Value-Free Science? Ideals and Illusions. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layard, Richard. 2010. “Measuring Subjective Well-Being.” Science 327 (5965): 534–35. doi:10.1126/science.1186315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lips, P., Cooper, C., Agnusdei, D., Caulin, F., Egger, P., Johnell, O., Reginster, J. Y., de Vernejoul, M. C., and Wiklund, I.. 1997. “Quality of Life as Outcome in the Treatment of Osteoporosis: The Development of a Questionnaire for Quality of Life by the European Foundation for Osteoporosis.” Osteoporosis International 7:36–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matheson, J. 2011. “Measuring What Matters.” Report, UK Office for National Statistics, Newport.Google Scholar
Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Seaford, Charles. 2011. “Policy: Time to Legislate for the Good Life.” Nature 477:532–33. doi:10.1038/477532a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Visser-Meily, A., Post, M., Schepers, V., and Linderman, E.. 2005. “Spouses’ Quality of Life 1 Year after Stroke: Prediction at the Start of Clinical Rehabilitation.” Cerebrovascular Diseases 20:443–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacks, Jeff M., and Maley, C. J.. 2007. “What's Hot in Psychology.” APS Observer 20:23–26.Google Scholar