Imagine that you’re part of a committee that’s making a decision about whether to award an assistant professor tenure. Suppose there are two qualifications that she needs to have: 1) she has to be a good teacher and 2) she needs to have written a few good journal articles. One third of the committee members think that she is a good teacher but has not written good articles, one third think that she has written good articles but is not a good teacher, and one third think that she meets both qualifications. What decision do you think the committee should make?
That’s an example of what in the literature is known as a ‘discursive dilemma’.
Here’s a different kind of case. Suppose the lounge at your workplace is being renovated. Employees are asked for their opinions on what colours they want for the carpet and the walls. The options for carpet colours are burgundy, white, and cream. The options for the walls are white, ecru, and lavender. (In case you’re wondering, Erin came up with these colours — I thought I was reasonably good with colours, at least by male standards, but I had no idea what ecru was.) One quarter of the employees want burgundy for the carpet and white for the walls, one quarter want burgundy and ecru, one quarter white and lavender, and one quarter want cream and lavender. So, at the meeting called to decide these matters, the results of the votes are as follows:
Carpet colour:
burgundy – 50%
white – 25%
cream – 25%
Wall colour:
lavender – 50%
white – 25%
ecru – 25%
So it seems clear what should be done: install burgundy carpet and paint the walls lavender.
But, alas, burgundy and lavender clash horribly, as all the employees knew perfectly well. After all, notice that none of them wanted that particular combination.
So what should be done?
Sydney