The Health & Well-Being Inventory is an assessment tool to quantify the health and well-being of an individual in comparison to their nation.
I break down “health” into six categories: physical, mental, psychological, emotional, social, and economic. An individual, or nation, is scored using a typical five-letter grading system – A to F. An A is worth 4 points, an F zero. The six categories are weighted, or given a value (1 to 5, five being the highest) by the importance to the overall functioning of the person or country.
A perfect score would be 104, or a 4.0 GPA. An average score would be 52. In the chart below, I rated myself and the USA. The weights I assigned are, of course, subjective. You might value the categories differently. And, one could argue, that the Fundamental Attribution Error applies. As well as the tendency to overestimate oneself, and underestimate the other, or the overconfidence barrier.
What it means
is that I’m in good health (a B average), 31 points above average. And that the USA is in poor health (a D+ average), 15 points below average. Thus, the country is barely passing. This once great nation is on life support, or the brink of catastrophe. That’s my assessment.
of course, is the big question. (Assuming my scoring and apparatus is close to accurate.)
I have based my Self inventory on the facts that I am a 70 yr-old divorced, white male with children; and compared myself to others in that demographic.
Now some might say the why of my being healthy is due to “white privilege”. I get that. Certainly there is some of that; but how much? If I were to weight that, maybe that counts for 20%? But the other 80%? I’d distribute to family stability and support, genes, intelligence, strength, grit, vigor, diet, self-respect, personality, and so on.
My Social score is not that good, barely passing (C-), of which my individuality is also culpable. As well as my Economic score (C).
I could’ve done better. Maybe?
Why is the country on the brink?
Is the next big question. Is it racism? As many would want you to believe? I don’t think so. Racism accounts for, maybe 20%? But 80% might be attributed to the other factors.
The Great Divide
is basically that. One side is weighted towards individualism, the other situational. That’s it in a nutshell. I think the evidence is overwhelming. Otherwise one could accurately predict a child’s outcome from birth. Or at least ACE (adverse childhood experiences) inventory. But we can’t.
The Great Divide is a function of The Great Debate. Meaning that individuals and institutions thrive on conflict and competition. Some more than others. Which leads to winners and losers. Because that’s the way it is.
People are different. And people will disagree because of that. Therefore, people will form alliances to try and win the debate. However you define winning. Which is also under dispute depending upon, that’s right, individual differences.
Why we fight.
Some people like violence, fighting. Others don’t. The thing about violence is that there is no doubt about who wins. Unless someone stops the fight. A referee.
is what we do. However, the rules of game are up for debate. What counts as winning? Is it how much money you have? Is it who you know, who are your friends? Is it how much love you have? or give? Is it how much you accumulate? Is it beauty? Are you beautiful? Who decides?
Or is it your health and well being?
Who determines that?