The Complexities of Adaptive Preferences in Post-compulsory Education: Insights from the Fable of The Fox and the Grapes

Adaptive preferences are a central justification and ongoing problem for capability analyses of well-being. Orthodox interpretations of what constitutes human flourishing may lead to the misattribution of adaptive preferences and therefore downgrade the importance of human diversity in capability analyses. The complex interplay between adaptation and the multiple realizability of capabilities is addressed in the context of post-compulsory education. Care needs to be taken to distinguish between adaptations to education in general and particular forms of education. Elster's interpretation of adaptive preferences, which he illustrates with reference to the fable of <italic>The Fox and the Grapes</italic>, is used to offer a conceptual framework that is sensitive to such distinctions. A series of hypothetical examples, located in the field of post-compulsory education, show how freedom of choice can be limited by downgrading and upgrading the inaccessible. It is argued that approaches to human well-being (such as the capability approach) that recognize the validity of different realizations of the good life must also be sensitive to different realizations of adaptive preferences. Although the argument is illustrated with reference to the field of post-compulsory education, its ethical concern makes it pertinent to other aspects of human flourishing.