how to define succes

Why you need to weigh trade‑offs Values often conflict in real choices (e.g., ambition vs. family time; honesty vs. kindness). “Weigh trade‑offs explicitly” means make those conflicts visible and decide, ahead of time, which values you’ll sacrifice in some situations and which you treat as non‑negotiable. That reduces drift into unexamined habits and regret. Quick conceptual distinctions - Non‑negotiables (lexical or threshold rules): values you will not compromise (or only above a very high threshold). Rawlsian lexical priority is one model: some goods are given higher-ranking protection. - Weighted trade‑offs: assign relative importance to values and allow compromise when gains on higher‑weight items outweigh losses on lower‑weight ones. - Satisficing/thresholds: require minimum levels for certain values; once met, optimize others. (Sen’s capability approach emphasizes protecting basic capabilities.) Five practical steps 1. Make values explicit: write them down and describe what each looks like in practice. 2. Identify likely conflicts: list decisions where values clash (e.g., late work vs. family dinner). 3. Set non‑negotiables and thresholds: decide which values you won’t cede (e.g., “I will never miss my child’s bedtime more than twice a month”) or what minimum level you require. 4. Assign weights or rules: either give numeric weights (career 0.6, family 0.9) or use simple rules (lexical: family > career; satisficing: ensure health ≥ X, then pursue ambition). Use a short decision matrix for important recurring choices. 5. Review and adjust: test rules in real situations, monitor outcomes and feelings, and revise when life circumstances or priorities change. Short examples - Honesty vs. kindness: Non‑negotiable = avoid malicious lies; trade‑off = allow tactful omissions to preserve relationships. - Career vs. family: Threshold = two evenings/week reserved for family; outside those blocks, career commitments are negotiable. Practical tips - Prefer clear, actionable formulations (”I will not work after 8pm on weekdays except in emergencies”). - Consider reversibility and consequences: avoid sacrificing a non‑reversible good (health, trusting relationships) for short‑term gain. - Test rules with low‑stakes cases before applying to big decisions. - Keep moral integrity in view: some values are identity‑forming; compromising them can cause long‑term harm even if instrumentally beneficial. Further reading (select) - John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (lexical priority idea). - Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom (trade‑offs among capabilities). - Practical decision tools: weighted scoring matrices and satisficing theory (Herbert A. Simon). If you give two specific values you care about, I’ll show a short, concrete weighing rule you can apply.