Could a list of capabilities be a better criterion than well-being?

By Zeren @ 2025-09-07T05:02 (+4)

Neither is easy to measure. However, my intuition is that capabilities, in the sense that Nussbaum and Sen use the term, are broader than well-being. The question of whether we have the freedom to realize our possibilities is captured by the notion of capabilities.

Moreover, as a criterion for non-human lives, capabilities may also work better: we can assign specific capabilities to different species as our criteria. With that approach we may debate whether a long life is something we, as humans, should wish for a bug, while still recognizing its bodily health and bodily integrity.

nathan98000 @ 2025-09-10T19:16 (+1)

Not all capabilities matter. For example, the capability to burp really loudly is not a morally important one. If we were trying to improve the world, trying to give people the capability to burp loudly is not in the top 1000 list of things I'd suggest prioritizing.
And plausibly, the reason why this capability doesn't matter is because it doesn't promote wellbeing. And more generally, this might be true of any capability. The reason why the capability to get an education or access healthcare are important is precisely because they reliably lead to people living better lives.