Dangers of Monetary Commensurability: A Psychological Game Model of Contagion

Matthew Spitzer recently wrote: "One who is to write a comment on a well-done piece has two choices. The commentator can nit pick over details or use the well-done article as a starting place for further work. I choose to do the latter."2 His comment applies to the task of commenting on Matthew Adler's3 and Richard Craswell's4 contributions to this Symposium. Adler found that incommensurability does not prevent using (the monetized version of) cost-benefit analysis (CBA), except possibly for a psychological claim related to commodification.5 Craswell concluded that incommensurability as presently formulated does not prevent applying welfare economics to evaluate government decisions.6 Craswell noted that his definition of incommensurability differs from the related concern of commodification, which he views as being about the cognitive and social psychological