text: to quantify the unmeasurable and to construct valid indexes. Some representative attempts at solutions, both theoretical and empirical, which challenge the limits to human wisdom are described below. (a) The UNRISD index of level of living 45. The aggregation procedure proposed by UNRISD is essentially that of deriving a composite index from the quantity and quality indica­ tors contained in its version of social indicators. To be specific, each in­ dicator is translated into three critical points by comparing its value to the pre-specified minimum and maximum values of the -indicator. 32 Each transformed intermediate indicator index is then multiplied by its distributive coefficient to derive the definitive (adjusted) indicator index. Finally, in aggregating the definitive indicator indexes, two al­ ternative methods are suggested; namely, the equal weights system or the sliding weights system. 46. This proposed approach is bold in its treatment of the distribu­ tive aspect of each indicator as well as in the combining of quantity and quality indexes. Aside from the questions of the adequacy and com­ prehensiveness of this indicator framework discussed above (para.29), this method fails to be persuasive in at least two aspects. First, it is dif­ ficult to give a significant theoretical or statistical mean1ng and interpre­ tation to the product of a measure of level and a measure of distribution. At best, it could be said that the procedure implicitly gave equal weight to the level and distribution measures. However, the product of the two is a number without a proper nomenclature. Secondly the specified weights for the quantity and quality indicators have little theoretical and empirical justification except as an opinion by the experts. Since the state of social sciences is such that, for example, there is no agreed-upon definition of health, the difficulties in deriving the unitary index of 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing the development of an index to measure the level of living in a society, taking into account both the quantity and quality of various indicators. The focus is on the theoretical and empirical challenges of creating such an index, including the difficulty of combining different types of data and the lack of agreed-upon definitions for certain concepts. This suggests that the text is related to the field of social sciences, particularly in the areas of development and welfare.