The saying “don’t compare apples to oranges” is often used to dismiss comparisons as meaningless. But is it always true? This idiom, and its more academic cousin “incommensurability,” frequently obscure rather than illuminate the nuances of comparison. While seemingly straightforward, a closer look reveals a complex issue with important implications for how we understand and evaluate different experiences. This article will explore the meaning of incommensurability, its limitations, and why simple comparisons, even between seemingly disparate things, can still hold value.
The Problem with “Incommensurable”
Philosophers often employ the term “incommensurable” to describe things lacking a common measure. This sounds precise, but as philosopher Ruth Chang argues, it often muddies the waters. “Incommensurable” is frequently conflated with “incomparable,” which is a mistake. Just because two things lack a single, universal measure doesn’t mean they can’t be compared at all.
Apples and Oranges: A Case Study in Comparison
Consider the classic example: apples and oranges. While they are different fruits, they can be compared across various dimensions: sweetness, size, nutritional value, price, and even color. The fact that an apple might be tarter than an orange doesn’t render the comparison of their sweetness meaningless. It simply highlights a difference along a specific dimension of comparison.
Beyond Fruit: Comparing Complex Experiences
The principle extends beyond simple objects to more complex experiences. Consider the feeling of being overworked. One person’s experience of overwork in a demanding office job might seem vastly different from another’s in a physically demanding manual labor role. While the nature of the work and associated stressors differ significantly, both individuals experience strain, exhaustion, and potentially negative impacts on well-being.
We can compare these experiences using various metrics: hours worked, physical exertion, emotional toll, and impact on personal life. While a direct, one-to-one comparison might not be perfectly accurate, we can still make meaningful observations about the relative intensity, duration, and consequences of their respective experiences. We can acknowledge that one type of overwork might be objectively more harmful or exploitative than another, without denying the validity of either person’s feelings.
The Value of Nuance: Acknowledging Both Similarity and Difference
The key is to acknowledge both the similarities and differences. Saying “don’t compare apples to oranges” risks dismissing legitimate concerns by implying that experiences are entirely unique and therefore incomparable. This can lead to a lack of empathy and understanding. Conversely, recognizing common ground while respecting unique challenges allows for a more nuanced and productive dialogue. It allows us to acknowledge that even seemingly “privileged” problems can be genuinely difficult for the individuals experiencing them, without minimizing the struggles faced by others in less fortunate circumstances.
Conclusion: Embracing Comparison, Rejecting Oversimplification
Ultimately, the problem isn’t with comparison itself, but with oversimplification. Instead of dismissing comparisons outright, we should strive for more nuanced and multi-faceted approaches. Recognizing that things can be both similar and different, comparable along some dimensions but not others, allows for a more accurate and empathetic understanding of the world and the diverse experiences within it. The next time you hear “don’t compare apples to oranges,” remember that even seemingly dissimilar things can offer valuable insights when compared thoughtfully.
