Discussion of methodology vs. value equation

• [Discussion of methodology vs.
  • balance

MasatoshiAdachi []](https://x.com/MasatoshiAdachi/status/1806552709820231800) I’ve heard a lot about @takahiroanno’s initiative for Tokyo gubernatorial candidate to debate policies on GitHub. As a person who planned and promoted this kind of initiative in Japan in the early days (self-proclaimed), I have a lot to say about it. Regarding the Git contraption, it is important to note that it is better suited for methodological discussions but not for discussions of value equations, rather than the publicly pointed out threshold of pluricles, etc. [Governor Election The Manifesto has been published to Github and I explain what I’m doing with the Github Actions workflowGitHub - Qiita https://qiita.com/genimura/items/426767278333a92f80db ]

MasatoshiAdachi PullRikku basically works for issues where the usefulness of the proposal can be objectively verified by a third party, but for value judgments where one should be preferred over the other after weighing different values, there is no consensus on objective “rightness” (from God’s point of view, an open community). However, when it comes to value judgments, such as which one should be preferred after weighing different values, there is no consensus on objective “rightness” (from God’s point of view and in an open community). For example, it is possible to discuss “how” to achieve “speed” and “how” to achieve “accuracy” if there is a consensus on the evaluation method for speed and accuracy. There is no assumption that it is right to prioritize one over the other. As long as there is no decisive factor, the discussion cannot be settled. - Trade-off slider

MasatoshiAdachi Elections are more like a process of choosing which side you want the person to fall on in this trade-off between speed and accuracy than the content of the how The current electoral system is not a system that has a binding manifesto. Since the current election system cannot make manifestos binding, the most satisfactory choice should be based on the “values” of the candidates. While it is important to discuss how to verify the feasibility of a manifesto, if the discussion of how becomes a reason for differentiation at the election stage, it creates a fraudulent construct like a conflict of values masquerading as a conflict of methodologies, which may distort the expression of value judgments by those who are interested in a single issue. For example, as in the relationship between social security and national security in the financial resources debate, those who do not care about financial resources as long as they can obtain financial support for child rearing are taken in by groups that advocate a methodology in which financial resources for child rearing support are raised from defense spending cuts (and vice versa).

MasatoshiAdachi I welcome the Git approach in specific administrative situations from the standpoint of interactivity and real-time performance, but I hope that the discussion in and of itself does not develop into an election decision criteria. I hope that the discussion will not become a criterion for election decisions. ↓Memories of the past Government Offices Start on the Path to DevOps - Japan Patent Office Adopts GitHub as Open Validation Platform for IP Due Diligence Standard Procedures | IT Leaders

Governor’s Race 2024.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/方法論の議論と価値衡量の議論 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.