1. An Experimental Investigation of the Good Life
What we value
An Experimental Investigation of the Good Life

2. The project What we value in life, the good life, and well-being
A Book with Peter Unger (NYU)
Tests famous thought experiments from philosophy and studies from psychology that claim to demonstrate what we value in life
Is this experimental philosophy?
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

3. The general approach
Strong majority views about what is valuable are used as evidence in normative ethics
Utilitarianism could endorse slavery
No moral theory that could endorse slavery is a good moral theory (based on the widespread view that slavery is abhorrent)
Therefore, utilitarianism is not a good moral theory
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

4. The general approach
Thought experiments are often used to elicit views about the value of things
Thought experiments can mislead us in ways we are not aware of
2 & 3 are dubious and can be challenged by x-phi
1 isn’t dubious, but x-phi might reveal that people don’t accept it
An experience machine life has more happiness than a normal life
If happiness is all that really matters in life, then the vast majority of people would choose an experience machine life over a normal life
The vast majority of people would not choose an experience machine life over a normal life
Therefore, happiness is not all that really matters in life
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

5. The general approach Test the original scenario
Ask why they chose that
Assess the justifications and relevant biases literature to see what modifications are required
Make 1 change at a time, test new scenarios on similar groups, compare results
There is this amazing experience machine designed by super-duper neuropsychologists…
Would you live the rest of your life in such a machine?
Yes No
Briefly justify your choice for 1.
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

6. Difficulties with x-phi
People are strange
Time
Sampling
Cost
Philosopher’s can’t do stats
Trust (Marc Hauser)
General problems with experimental psychology (repligate)
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

7. Experiments so far Experience machine
Trolley problem (not part of this project)
Parfit’s surgery case
Diener et al.’s length of life cases
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., & Oishi, S. (2001). End effects of rated life quality: The James Dean effect. Psychological Science, 12(2),
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

8. length of a happy life The Common Sense Hypothesis
Happy lives are more desirable if longer
The James Dean Hypothesis
Short happy lives are more desirable than long lives
The Duration Neglect Hypothesis
The length of a life doesn’t affect its desirability
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

9. length of a happy life The Common Sense Hypothesis
Happy lives are more desirable if longer
The James Dean Hypothesis
Short happy lives are more desirable than long lives
The Duration Neglect Hypothesis
The length of a life doesn’t affect its desirability
Doesn’t have a preference
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

10. Diener et al.’s study
Jen [Jan] was a never-married woman without children. Her life was extremely happy, with enjoyable work, vacations, friends, and pleasant leisure. Jen died suddenly and painlessly in an automobile accident, when she was 30 [60] years old.
Taking Jen’s life as a whole, how desirable was her life?
How much total happiness would you say that Jen experienced in her life?
Please briefly explain your answer to questions 1&2:
Most un-desirable 1 2 3 4
Neutral 5 6 7 8
Most desirable 9 O
Most un-happy 1 2 3 4
Neutral 5 6 7 8
Most happy 9 O
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

11. results
Diener et al. took the average of the desirability and total happiness responses for each respondent, and then compared the average of respondents’ judgments about the 30 and 60 year life.
We did the same
Diener et al.: “The age variable failed to have a significant effect,... This finding confirms the phenomenon of duration neglect…”
Our results are very similar
Study
Jen (30-year life)
Jan (60-year life)
Jan - Jen
Diener et al.
6.13
6.48
0.35
Weijers & Unger
6.26
6.15
-0.11
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

12. Implications for philosophy?
Prudential value: what is good for us
Used in moral theory, political philosophy, applied ethics, and public policy
Should governments focus on making our lives happy at the cost of them being long?
No speed limit
Decriminalize drugs
Subsidize alcohol and drugs
Scrap cancer research in favor of subsidizing vacations
Quantitative hedonism: lives are valued by summing the net happiness of each moment
Prudential theories that value lives in a way different to the vast majority of people are bad theories
The vast majority of people do not value lives by summing the net happiness of each moment
Therefore, quantitative hedonism is a bad theory
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

13. Or we can take a closer look
Potential methodological problems
Evaluating a life without a comparator is difficult
Many respondents de-valued the lives because the women were “never-married… without children”
“Total happiness” data might not be relevant to desirability for all
The scale and labels might cause problems (“most desirable” and “most undesirable” are ambiguous)
Potential solutions
Compare Jen’s (30) and Jan’s (60) lives directly against each other
Rewrite the scenario so it doesn’t mention whether they were married with children or not
Do not combine the “desirability” and “total happiness” responses
Run the study with a simpler response mechanism (whose life is more desirable, or are they equal?)
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

14. Directly comparing the lives
Respondents were presented with both lives at the same time (with the same question wording as before)
It made a decent difference, BUT:
“never-married… without children” still a problem
Results for “desirability” are different from those for “total happiness”
The scale and labels might cause problems
Study
Jen (30-year life)
Jan (60-year life)
Jan - Jen
Diener et al.
Rate 1
6.13
6.48
0.35
Weijers & Unger
6.26
6.15
-0.11
Rate both
5.81
6.60
0.79
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

15. Clean “never married” etc.
Clean: “Imagine someone was extremely happy for every year of their life, until they died suddenly and painlessly in an automobile accident at age 30 [60].”
General increase, BUT:
Results for “desirability” are different from those for “total happiness”
The scale and labels might cause problems
Study
Jen (30-year life)
Jan (60-year life)
Jan - Jen
Diener et al.
Rate 1
6.13
6.48
0.35
Weijers & Unger
6.26
6.15
-0.10
Rate both
5.81
6.60
0.79
Rate 1-clean
6.73
7.32
0.58
Rate both-clean
7.22
8.23
1.02
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

16. Desirability results only
Instead of combining “desirability” with “total happiness”, we just took the desirability measure
Increase for “rate both”, BUT:
The scale and labels might cause problems
Study
30 combined
60 combined
Combined 60-30
30 desire only
60 desire only
Desire only 60-30
Diener et al.
Rate 1
6.13
6.48
0.35 ?
Weijers & Unger
6.26
6.15
-0.10
5.74
5.35
-0.40
Rate both
5.81
6.60
0.79
4.72
6.21
1.49
Rate 1-clean
6.73
7.32
0.58
6.12
6.66
0.54
Rate both-clean
7.22
8.23
1.02
6.40
7.83
1.43
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

17. Dropping the scale (Clean)
Imagine two people who didn’t know each other. The first was happy for every year of their life, until they died suddenly and painlessly in an automobile accident at age 30. The second was happy for every year of their life, until they died suddenly and painlessly in an automobile accident at age 60.
Which life was more desirable?
O The first (30-year) life was a more desirable life than the second (60-year) life.
O The second (60-year) life was a more desirable life than the first (30-year) life.
O The two lives are equally desirable.
Please briefly explain your answer to question 1:
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

18. Dropping the scale Simple test
Can’t use the “rate 1” versions for this
Unclean version had many family- related justifications
Duration neglect is looking strong!
Study
Desire30-y more
Desire 60-y more
Desire both equal
Theory
James Dean
Common Sense
Duration Neglect
Weijers & Unger
10%
46%
44%
Weijers & Unger clean 4%
40%
56%
Weijers & Unger clean (happy instead of extremely happy) 3%
39%
58%
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

19. Un-scaling the scale
We could also convert the scales into answers that would fit three options:
O The first (30-year) life was a more desirable life than the second (60-year) life.
If they rated the 30-year life as more desirable than the 60-year one on the scale
O The second (60-year) life was a more desirable life than the first (30-year) life.
If they rated the 60-year life as more desirable than the 30-year one on the scale
O The two lives are equally desirable.
If they rated the two lives as equally desirable on the scale
That way, we can see whether the different measures get the same result
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

20. Combining the results Just uses desirability
Can’t use the “rate 1” versions for this
Unclean versions seem less reliable
The race is close!
Study
Desire 30-year more
Desire 60-year more
Desire both equal
Theory
James Dean
Common Sense
Duration Neglect
Weijers & Unger
10%
46%
44%
Weijers & Unger clean 4%
40%
56%
Weijers & Unger clean (happy instead of extremely happy) 3%
39%
58%
Weijers & Unger scale
21%
54%
26%
Weijers & Unger scale + clean 7%
52%
42%
Weijers & Unger scale + clean (55 vs 65) 2%
62%
36%
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

21. Another way to look at it
This analysis combines the results of the 30 vs 60 year and 55 vs 65 year clean scale studies
Thinking about the wording of the scenario and scale labels, this seems similar to what common sense would predict
But, this shows the power of non-scientific/statistical methods!
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

22. What now? Summary of quantitative analyses
The Duration Neglect hypothesis has support from one set of studies and the Common Sense hypothesis has support from another set
Which is the better (more reliable, accurate) method?
Qualitative analysis
Every survey (of ours) asked respondents to justify their position
Some answers show imaginative resistance or overactive imagination
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

23. Qualitative analysis Shouldn’t be done by the lead researchers… But…
Most justifications for responses in line with the Common Sense hypothesis claim something like:
“more happy years is more desirable”
Most justifications for responses in line with the Duration Neglect hypothesis are split between two kinds:
“length of life doesn’t matter”
“all human lives are equally valuable/I won’t judge”
This last justification seems a little strange – it endorses Everything Neglect when evaluating lives on desirability (which surely can’t be true for them!)
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

24. Or run more studies
We are going to ask people about how many more happy years they want in their lives (this should(??) destroy the Duration Neglect hypothesis!)
What is your age? How many more happy years would you like to live?
If they were guaranteed happy years, how many more would you like to live before a painless death: 1 or 31?
If they were guaranteed happy years, how many more would you like to live before a painless death: 30 or 60?
We are also going to test more than 2 lives at once:
Imagine three people. The first was happy for every year of their life, until they died suddenly and painlessly in an automobile accident at age 25. The second [the same, but died] at age 50. The third [the same, but died] at age 75.
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

25. One more finding
Most respondents in the scale studies thought the two lives (30 & 60 or 55 & 65) had equal total happiness, even when we bolded the word total!!
Unclean study = strange results
Most respondents think the total happiness in a life is not a simple sum of the happy parts, but the simple average!
Will follow up with peak-end rule
Study
Total happy 30-year more
Total happy 60-year more
Both equal total happy
Weijers & Unger scale
21%
23%
56%
Weijers & Unger scale + clean 0%
25%
75%
Weijers & Unger scale + clean (55 vs 65) 2%
38%
61%
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016

26. conclusion General Experimental philosophy is hard
It takes a long time
Multiple methods should be combined for more robust results
It’s no wonder many experiments’ results aren’t highly replicable
Always ask the qualitative question
Some people believe very unusual things
Specific
Some students think they think that length of life doesn’t matter
Most students (probably) think that length of life is important, but far from the only intrinsically important thing in life
i.e., there is probably a partial duration neglect effect when we evaluate lives in ideal conditions
Dan Weijers: Keynote for the Davis Undergraduate Philosophy Conference April 23, 2016