Towards a pragmatic capability approachessays on human development, agency and pragmatism

Resumen

Amartya Sen's Capability Approach (CA) makes an important contribution to the development literature. It moves from the conventional focus on a single indicator: opulence, to an emphasis on people, their plurality, and the multiple dimensions characterizing their quality of life. As such, it proposes an influential account of human beings and their agency. Its advantages notwithstanding, its notion of agency seems to warrant in depth scrutiny. This dissertation explores the actual scope of the CA's agency as well as its limitations, and suggests a way to complement it. An account of the capabilitarian agent encompasses two elements: freedom or choice and rationality or reasoning. Thus, the CA rejects the conventional rational agent, advancing instead a reasoning one. As such, the CA's agency seems to require attention to measurement and explanation (observables) as well as to meaning and interpretation (unobservables), which demands moving beyond a positivistic philosophy of science. At the same time, it is found that this notion seems to leave people who have others choosing and reasoning for them unaccounted for. To provide a complement the CA on both counts, John Dewey's pragmatism is proposed. It is a philosophy that provides an account of how people think and act. The elaboration of pragmatic agency is carried out from philosophical ontology. Pragmatism is located within the analyticist philosophy of science, as it adheres to mind-world monism and phenomenalism. While the former is evidenced in its concept of transaction, suggesting the mutual constitution of humans and their contexts, the latter is evidenced in its attention to objects, which are anything that a person notices (including in-principle unobservables). The meanings of objects are expressed in terms of action and depend on habits, which are predispositions for actions and, as such, more intimate and informative than choices. Pragmatism, therefore, encompasses more than reflective action.. Accounting for the pragmatic transagent, thus, requires the scrutiny of objects and habits, which implies the inclusion of meaning and interpretation. Consequently, it is found that the CA's reasoning agent can benefit from the inclusion of in-principle unbservables by dint of pragmatic objects and habits, enhance the elements constituting individuals with these same elements, make sense of the nature and function of values and preferences, and enrich its account of the relation between individuals and their context by dint of pragmatic transaction. Therefore, the pragmatic transagent can account for the groups dropped by the CA. Additionally, pragmatism can complement the CA in other aspects. Concerning ontology, while the CA has abstained from addressing ontological issues, pragmatism is found to adhere to an analyticist philosophy of science, which seems to agree with the CA's reasoning agent and its constituting elements: choice (observables) and reasoning (unobservables). As for empirical issues, the CA has supported its flexibility on a lay understanding of pragmatism, since it seems to maintain positivist traces. Subscribing to it philosophically could prove beneficial. Apropos of freedom, pragmatism's naturalist philosophy can contribute to alleviate the CA's focus on choice and to account for the continuity of behavior, encompassing non-reflective as well as reflective action, seemingly the main focus of the CA. With respect to democracy, pragmatism casts a wider net than the CA applying democracy to all levels of human association, not only society or the state, which seems to be the CA's concern. Finally, as regards normativity, although both are consequentialist, while the CA holds freedom and achievement as the end, pragmatism advances solely action. These are not incompatible positions. To the extent that the CA can further action, a pragmatic capability approach can accommodate regarding development as freedom.