EDIT: Also, the point of this sort of exercise isn’t merely to ‘become more productive’ - it’s to gather data to help achieve whatever outcome you find valuable in your life. Maybe it’s studying more for his exams (certainly different than working more at your 9 to 5 bigco job fwiw), maybe it’s spending more quality time with family, etc. The point is collecting this sort of data doesn’t necessarily lead solely to optimizing your output under capitalism, it can be a tool for better living. I think.
On a large scale, science (and economics) is a drive to amass data, which has led to vast reductions in human suffering.
Amassing data lets one (and mankind) make decisions not on random conjecture or feeling, but on a solid footing, which results in better decisions on how to allocate resources. Not gathering data where it's possible to do so results in more human suffering from making sub-optimal decisions from bad inputs.
Quantification is a means to control. Some things - in my opinion - ought not to be controlled.
"Better" is extremely relative. Better for whom?
What percentage of people would you claim worldwide or over the past 100 years are worse off as a result of science and economic advances? Care to list why they're worse off in total?