practicality of capabilities?

After reading the first few chapters of Sen, what I took issue with most were Sen’s alternative uses of capability information. While he argued for three alternative approaches to the foundational concern, none of them seemed to bring us to an actual understanding of how development as freedom could be practically used. Although Sen gives reasoning as to why other approaches (ex: utilitarianism) do not work due to the heterogeneity of factors that influence individual advantage and the impossibility of conducting interpersonal comparisons, he does not give a clear explanation as to how capabilities can be used. I understand this is part of his intention in explaining that no one can tell a specific group of people what freedoms should matter to them, and the trade-offs of different freedoms should be decided through the democratic process. Additionally, I understand how the enhancement of freedoms as a whole should be the goal and society is improving if you are expanding the freedoms such as the ones listed in his categories. However, like my peers, I do think his account of freedom does seem to fall into ideal theory. He provides 1) the direct approach (through comparing vectors of functionings or capabilities either through total comparison, partial ranking, or distinguished capability comparison), 2) the supplementary approach (traditional procedures with supplements of capabilities), and 3) the indirect approach (incomes appropriately adjusted after giving weights to capabilities and adding/subtracting from income). Even so, Sen points out that each is problematic in its own way and fails to address the non-comparability of freedoms. Though it is beneficial and more encompassing to use a different metric (freedom) rather than income, I do not think it necessitates a solution and it does seem even in a democracy the dominant class will be able to advocate for their freedoms above those of lower classes (even if we do not reach the point of having a famine.)