Abstract
On the orthodox view in economics, interpersonal comparisons of utilityare not empirically meaningful, and ``hence'' impossible. To reassess this view, this paper draws onthe parallels between the problem of interpersonal comparisons of utility and the problem of translation of linguisticmeaning, as explored by Quine. I discuss several cases of what the empirical evidence for interpersonal comparisonsof utility might be and show that, even on the strongest of these, interpersonal comparisons are empiricallyunderdetermined and, if we also deny any appropriate truth of the matter, indeterminate. However, the underdeterminationcan be broken non-arbitrarily (though not purely empirically) if (i) we assign normative significance to certainstates of affairs or (ii) we posit a fixed connection between certain empirically observable proxies and utility.I conclude that, even if interpersonal comparisons are not empirically meaningful, they are not in principle impossible.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Arrow, K.: 1951/1963, Social Choice and Individual Values, Wiley, New York.
d'Aspremont, C.: 1985,‘Axioms for Social Welfare Orderings’ in L. Hurwicz, D. Schmeidler, and H. Sonnenschein (eds.), Social Goals and Social Organization, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 19–76.
Bossert, W. and J. A. Weymark: 1996,‘Utility in Social Choice’ forthcoming in S. Barberà, P. J. Hammond, and C. Seidel (eds.), Handbook of Utility Theory, Vol. 2, Kluwer, Boston.
Chomsky, N.: 1969,‘Quine's Empirical Assumptions’ in D. Davidson and J. Hintikka (eds.), Words and Objections: Essays on the Work of W. V. Quine, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 53–68.
Davidson, D.: 1974,‘Belief and the Basis of Meaning’ Synthese 27, 309–323.
Davidson, D.: 1986,‘Judging Interpersonal Interests’ in J. Elster and A. Hylland (eds.), Foundations of Social Choice Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Debreu, G.: 1954,‘Representation of a Preference Ordering by a Numerical Function’ in Thrall, Coombs and Davies (eds.), Decision Processes, Wiley, New York.
Elster, J. and J. E. Roemer (eds.): 1991, Interpersonal Comparisons of Well-Being, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Gibson, R.: 1986,‘Translation, Physics, and Facts of the Matter’ in L. E. Hahn, and P. A. Schilpp (eds.), The Philosophy of W. V. Quine, Open Court, La Salle, IL.
Harsanyi, J.: 1955,‘Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility’ Journal of Political Economy 63, 309–321.
Hausman, D.: 1995,‘The Impossibility of Interpersonal Utility Comparisons’ Mind 104, 473–490.
Jevons, S.: 1911, The Theory of Political Economy, 4th edn, Macmillan, London.
List, C.: 1999,‘Craig's Theorem and the Empirical Underdetermination Thesis Reassessed’ Disputatio 7, 28–39.
List, C.: 2001,‘A Note on Introducing a‘Zero-Line’ of Welfare as an Escape-Route from Arrow's Theorem’ Pacific Economic Review 6(2), special section in honour of Amartya Sen, pp. 223–238.
von Neumann, J. and O. Morgenstern: 1944, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Quine, W. V.: 1960, Word and Object, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Quine, W. V.: 1970,‘On the Reasons for Indeterminacy of Translation’ Journal of Philosophy 67, 178–183.
Robbins, L.: 1932, An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, Macmillan, London.
Sen, A. K.: 1970/1979, Collective Choice and Social Welfare, Holden-Day, San Franscisco (1970); North Holland, Amsterdam (1979).
Waldner, I.: 1972,‘The Empirical Meaningfulness of Interpersonal Utility Comparisons’ Journal of Philosophy 69, 87–103.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
List, C. Are Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility Indeterminate?. Erkenntnis 58, 229–260 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022094826922
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022094826922