The Nebulous Kingdom

Principles vs. Outcomes (Part I)

11/28/2010

Comments

 
Sometimes, in rare moments when I notice these things, I find myself arguing based on these resilient frames in my mind that are only faintly distinguishable from truth.  In these moments, I find myself trying to shoehorn the argument into the box instead of allowing the pressures of the argument to expand the box.  It’s the hardest thing to do, to set aside our beliefs, what we think we know, our religion, our very identities….and listen for what is true.

When I listen hard enough, and care, and wait – impatiently, over agonizing years sometimes – it might emerge, slowly.  I can’t insist though.  I find you can’t demand these things on a timeline.  There are questions I was insistently asking five years ago that are only beginning to give birth today. 

Sometimes that last effort of giving birth happens by just writing it down.

The consideration of principles versus outcomes has been one such question for me.  Underlying many arguments is this potent question:  What matters here – is it the principle of the thing or is it about what works? 

We don’t talk in these terms very much.  We argue and argue and never notice we are speaking different languages.  But many of the seemingly permanent social rifts of the day – health reform politics, drug legalization, Israeli-Palestinian tension – can be described in this way.

Here’s a concrete example:  crime.  Someone commits a serious offense, say, armed robbery that results in a shooting death.  The innocent individual shot has a young wife and two small children who’ll never grow up to know their father.  Our collective impulse is to punish, for justice to be served.  As Jonathan Haidt calls it, this is our shared moral pillar of fairness.  This is a principled view.

On the other hand, our government is responsible for overseeing not just an individual case, but rather a broad, long-run society with many people’s happinesses to consider.  What if the data suggests – as it does – that long jail terms turn first-time offenders into repeat offenders, increases recidivism across all offenders, constitutes a relatively ineffective deterrent, and is dramatically more expensive than rehabilitation?  An economist – the ultimate outcomes-oriented profession – might suggest that we should spend funds on books, skills training, one-on-one counseling, group therapy, arts education, and select television shows, or whatever constitutes the most effective evidence-based rehabilitation program.  This is the outcomes-based approach:  whatever works…even if we are repelled by the thought of a murderer at an easel painting at taxpayer’s expense.

Are we putting people in jail to punish or protect?  Is the argument that we are ‘punishing to protect’?  If so, perhaps we are being influenced by our moral outlook – since the data strongly indicates that the best long-run protection is effective rehabilitation.  It complicates the issue that our principles will change the way we see outcomes.

I believe in principles.  It’s very hard to navigate our lives well without them.  Nearly all of us live by principles.  At their best, principles are a distillation of what we know.  Treat people the way you want to be treated.  An eye for an eye.  Government enterprises are inefficient. 

The problem with principles, though, is that they can conflict with each other and conflict with reality as we know it, i.e. with outcomes.  They are also subject to the internal biases and subjective value set of an individual with a unique set of experiences – they might be twisted or just plain wrong.  And when two people bring two diametrically opposite sets of principles to the table – both sets of which are probably partly right and partly wrong – productive conversation is challenging.

I believe in outcomes as well.  I find the world a deeply uncertain place, and the ability to derive consistent results through experimentation is comforting.  It offers some measure of order in a chaotic world.  Show me the data.  For instance, we find if we look at the data, that Communism, while lovely in principle, tends to break down in practice.  The experience of our lives is based on phenomena, and reliance on phenomena-based data is therefore a consistently useful and effective strategy. 

The problem with an exclusive focus on outcomes, however, is that the data can mislead us.  The nature of data is that it is narrow in scope, limited to what we can measure today, and historical by necessity.  Even with gazillia-terabytes, data farm acres and enough processing power to make Google sweat, the dataset will always be incomplete.  That is, even if we captured all the data we theoretically could, there would still be massive seas between the atolls of data available to us and the objective world.  We virtually never have anywhere near the amount of data we’d need to make certifiably optimal decisions with long time horizons.  Our conclusions might also be narrowly right but actually very wrong in context.  It is that classic problem of the social sciences – especially economics – that in the real world, precision sacrifices accuracy and meaning.  Ask any honest long-term forecaster (if you can find any).

It would seem obvious to the thoughtful person that there should be some kind of interaction between principles and outcomes.  They serve as checks to each other, nurturing an ever-evolving mutual coherence.  Good principles are validated by outcomes, good outcomes are evaluated through the lens of principles.

Two questions occur to me:  Which should come first?  And which matters more when?  These are hard questions. 

*Writing by its nature is linear and I’m having a hard time writing a linear story that can answer these questions satisfactorily (which begs a completely different question about whether the linearity of our language reflects or creates the linearity of our experienced lives – a question for another time).  But I will try.

Comments
    Picture

    Author

    I'm interested in uncertainty, time, trust, consistency, strategy, economics, empathy, philosophy, education, technology, story-telling, and fractals.
    Contact

    Archives

    May 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015
    June 2015
    January 2015
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    February 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009

    RSS Feed


    My Favorite Curators


    Email newsletters

    Edge.org
    John Mauldin
    STRATFOR
    Futurity.org
    BPS Research Digest
    Domain-B.com
    FORA.tv
    PopTech!
    PIMCO Investment Outlooks
    GMO Client Reports
    Big Think
    Commonwealth Club
    Someecards.com
    MRN Research Papers
    Chicago Booth eNewsletters
    McKinsey Quarterly
    Boldtype / Artkrush
    Singularity University
    Charlie Rose
    The Aspen Institute


    Feeds

    WNYC
    Radiolab

    This American Life
    Freakonomics Radio
    The Moth
    Chicago Booth Podcast
    The Atlantic Council
    The Memory Palace
    TED.com
    Foreign Affairs
    The Ideas Project
    Long Now Foundation
    The School of Life
    Letters of Note

    Periodicals

    The Economist
    The Wall Street Journal
    The New Yorker
    The New York Times
    Wired Magazine
    The Atlantic

    Other Websites

    Oaktree Capital Memos
    LSE Public Lectures
    Bubblegeneration
    Becker-Posner Blog
    Eric Von Hippel
    NetAge
    John Seely Brown
    Malcolm Gladwell
    John Hagel
    HBR – The Big Shift
    LookBook.nu
    Robert Shiller
    Paul Graham
    Frontline PBS
    Royal Society for the Arts
    Blake Masters

    Humor

    Best of Craigslist
    Texts from Last Night
    FMyLIfe
    MyLifeisAverage
    Lamebook
    The Onion


    Categories

    All