Measurement and Comparison

Our daily lives involve a constant measurement/comparison of our current situation and who we perceive ourselves to be, against others or the ideals we have imbibed from our world.  

But most of us hardly ever really inquire into the role that measurement and comparison play in our daily lives. We just do it as a matter of habit, because that’s how we have learnt to exist from our childhood. We don’t really pause and look how this shapes us and our lives.

Let us then try to inquire into the meaning and the implication of measurements and comparisons in our lives.

Measurements in the Physical World

The root meaning of measure is “to ascertain spatial dimensions, quantity, or capacity of by comparison with a standard.”

All measurement has comparison implicit in it. Whatever we measure, must be compared with a standard. That’s the only way that measurement has any meaning.

All standards for physical measurement are made my humans i.e., they are mental constructions or abstractions, necessary for us to make sense of and manipulate our physical world. For instance, one meter as a universal standard of measurement of length, helps us to think about, discuss and understand the quantitative aspects of our physical environment in a common language. Similarly, we have qualitative standards of measurement for our physical world – colours, texture, shape, etc. While these qualitative standards are not as precise as the quantitative ones, they still do the job of helping us understand our physical world in a common language. For instance, while two people may disagree on what shade of red colour they see, they will most likely agree that it is a shade of colour red that they see.

Measurements in the Psychological World

However, when we extend measurement into our psychological lives, in order to make sense of ourselves and our relationship with the world around us, then there arise certain complications.

First obvious complication is that of standards. While we can all agree on meter as unit of measurement of length, and what colour red is, or what is soft and what is hard, how do we agree on definition on standards of how one should look, how one should live, what success, happiness, kindness, selfishness etc. are, and so on. Is it even possible to have standards for such terms that purport to measure something purely abstract?

So, another complication is that while measurement of physical world is essentially a process of abstracting a concrete reality in order to make sense of it, but in making psychological measurement we are trying to measure something that is abstract in order to make it less abstract or more concrete. E.g., when we measure one or many attributes of a physical object, that which is measured has a concrete existence while the standard of measurement is an abstraction. This measurement helps us to abstract or imagine a concrete reality. However, in trying to measure one’s looks, for example, one is dealing with an abstraction called ‘looks’- a purely mental concept. This concept is not a sum of one’s concrete physical attributes like height, weight, complexion etc. An image of how one appears is created in the mind, which is in part a synthesis of various physical attributes, but is also heavily influenced or conditioned by the prevalent standards of what good or ideal looks are. These prevalent standards are collective cultural and social constructions. This self-image which is an abstraction is then measured against the given standards which are equally abstract. Each individual then who has a different image of looks or success, or how one ought to live etc. is then busy measuring against prevalent standards which themselves keep shifting across time and space.

So then, unlike physical measurement which actually helps us to understand our physical world and communicate with each other in a common language, the psychological measurements because of their arbitrariness and shape shifting nature, only serve to muddy the waters and act as hindrances in trying to understand ourselves and our relationships.

True meaning of understanding ourselves would be to see abstractions as abstractions (as we inquired here), however believing in the reality of these measurements creates the illusion of a fixed nature and hence greater concreteness of our attributes, and thus prevents us from seeing what or who we really are and what our world really is. These measurements then become another ploy of the field of abstractions to maintain its continuity.

Another complication lies in the separation of the measurer and the measured. While in case of physical measurements, a ‘separation’ between what is measured (distance, weight, quantity etc.) and one who measures exists and this keeps the measurements objective and free of distortion no matter where or when they are repeated or who repeats them. But in case of psychological measurements, the measurer i.e. the individual is not separate from the measured i.e. the psychological attributes one is trying to measure. The individual which is itself an abstract entity, (as we inquired here) trying to measure one or more of its abstract attributes, is always bound to be a heavily distorted process with distorted results. Environmental factors, one’s emotional state, one’s self interests etc., experiences, conditioning, fears, desires etc. are all the factors that would distort the measurement.

So we can see, at least intellectually, that psychological measurements make no sense at all. Not only that they do not help us to understand ourselves and our relationship with the world in any way, they in fact create further confusions and conflicts, both within ourselves and with others around us. All measurement is comparison- either with others or with one’s own image of how one ought to be. And isn’t the perceived gap between what is and what ought to be (i.e. the image of what is and standards of what should be ) the cause of all suffering? So then comparison is in fact the root of all suffering.

So if this true and if we see it, then why is it that we still can’t give up such measurements?

Why are measurements such an intrinsic and indispensable part of our daily lives? Why is it that we tend to constantly compare ourselves with others/our past/our images of the ideal? Why do we need to measure and compare at all?

To understand this, we would need to inquire into the actual process of psychological measuring or comparing and its actual implications.

If it is such an indispensable part of our psychological lives then it must have a very fundamental relationship with our identities.

A tree is a tree only in comparison to all that which is not tree. A boy is a boy in comparison with all that which is not a boy. One is successful only in comparison to all that which is not successful. One is in a state of motion only in comparison to all that which is not in motion. So while we measure against standards, the process of comparing and contrasting against its linguistic ‘opposite’ is essential for us to be able to identify anything at all.

In other words, our language which we use to identify (i.e. give identity to) objects, events or ourselves is based on measurement. Every noun, adjective or verb exists only when measured against something else. Psychologically, when one compares oneself with others, it is actually a way to bolster and further define one’s identity.

Measurement seems to make the identity more solid, more concrete and hence more real. The more detailed and minute the measurements the clearer and more concrete the identity. E.g. a tree is a good basic identity, but a tree of x height, of y species, whose trunk has a particular girth, with leaves of a particular shape, size and colour, producing particular kinds of flowers and fruits is much more concrete and hence more “real” than just a tree.

So it is with us psychologically. The more we measure ourselves psychologically in ever greater details and ways, the more concrete and “real” our identities seem to be.

So there we have the paradox of measurements and comparisons : On one hand measurement and comparison cause all sorts of suffering and conflicts in our lives, on the other hand they give us our identities. They make us who we think we are, who we wish to be and guide our actions.

To truly give up measurement and comparison would imply having no particular or fixed identity – a scary or even an unimaginable proposition for most.

And that is why it is so difficult to give up measurements. So, we keep measuring and suffering. As long as we measure, we are doomed to suffer, no matter what we do or where we are.

Why is identity so essential to us? Is it possible to live without any fixed identity? What would be our state and the state of our world with no psychological measurement and hence no fixed psychological identity?