A foundational work on historical and social studies of quantification
What accounts for the prestige of quantitative methods? The usual answer is that quantification is desirable in social investigation as a result of its successes in science. Trust in Numbers questions whether such success in the study of stars, molecules, or cells should be an attractive model for research on human societies, and examines why the natural sciences are highly quantitative in the first place. Theodore Porter argues that a better understanding of the attractions of quantification in business, government, and social research brings a fresh perspective to its role in psychology, physics, and medicine. Quantitative rigor is not inherent in science but arises from political and social pressures, and objectivity derives its impetus from cultural contexts. In a new preface, the author sheds light on the current infatuation with quantitative methods, particularly at the intersection of science and bureaucracy.
Philosophy professor. Writes about games, trust, art, intimacy, echo chambers, metrics. My new book is GAMES: AGENCY AS ART: https://t.co/tFdq4LJygB
This is from Theodore Porter’s wonderful Trust in Numbers. Kern has a cool similar discussion in The Culture of Time and Space. We went on clock time, says Kern, about when we got trains and telegraphs.
government sanctioned master of library science, leftist, capybara lover, friend to the twitter bots, locked in an eternal struggle against the commodity form
@ariezrawaldman I did a seminar in undergrad that touched on that topic; some of my favs from it: Ann Blair - Too Much to Know Dan Bouk - How Our Days Became Numbered Theodore M. Porter - Trust in Numbers Orit Halpern - Beautiful Data