Critics say that focusing only on what can be easily measured means we might ignore skills and experiences that are hard to measure but still vital for flourishing. By stressing just one way to grow, we risk leaving out areas like creativity, moral thinking, and emotional strength from assessments, which leads to a limited idea of success.
Moreover, a unitary model risks reinforcing normative judgments regarding what constitutes ‘successful’ development, potentially pathologising valuable forms of divergence or interdisciplinary growth. A single-path model can also lead to narrow ideas about what counts as ‘successful’ development, sometimes treating different or mixed growth as a problem. But research shows that people grow in several partly separate ways, like intellectual, emotional, or ethical development, and these can move forward or backward at different times. For example, Gardner’s (1983) work on multiple intelligences shows that being strong in logical-mathematical skills does not mean someone is equally strong in social or self-understanding skills. Someone can be smart but not emotionally mature, or have spiritual depth but struggle with relationships. So, while a single-path model might seem simple and useful, it does not capture the real complexity and variety in how people develop. This includes both cognitive insight and emotional awareness to navigate complexity—such as a physician interpreting diagnostic data while communicating difficult news, or a musician uniting technical skill with creative expression and audience engagement. These examples illustrate that it is the dynamic interplay among distinct intelligences, rather than isolated strengths, that enables effective action. Conversely, imbalance—such as technical proficiency without ethical grounding, or emotional sensitivity without self-regulation—can result in dysfunction. Thus, flourishing depends on the coherent development and integration of multiple domains.
A key part of this framework is the idea that different types of intelligence work together, not separately. Research shows that when cognitive, emotional, and social skills are combined, people do better and adapt more easily, which supports the idea that flourishing depends on this mix (Halpern, 2003; Durlak et al., 2011; Wong & Law, 2002). For example, the CASEL framework adds social and emotional skills like self-awareness and decision-making to academic learning, putting this theory into practice in schools. However, things like standardised tests, focus on efficiency, and resource gaps can make it hard to achieve this balance. To truly support flourishing, we need to address these ongoing challenges.
Because people develop different abilities in different ways and settings, it is hard to create policies that work for everyone. These challenges show up in several important areas.
What do you think?
Bjorg Eggerts
7hh.is 