This investigation of the overwhelming appeal of
quantification in the modern world discusses the
development of cultural meanings of objectivity over two
centuries. How are we to account for the current
prestige and power of quantitative methods? The usual
answer is that quantification is seen as desirable in
social and economic investigation as a result of its
successes in the study of nature. Theodore Porter is not
content with this. Why should the kind of success
achieved in the study of stars, molecules, or cells be
an attractive model for research on human societies?, he
asks.And, indeed, how should we understand the
pervasiveness of quantification in the sciences of
nature? In his view, we should look in the reverse
direction: comprehending the attractions of
quantification in business, government, and social
research will teach us something new about its role in
psychology, physics, and medicine.Drawing on a wide
range of examples from the laboratory and from the
worlds of accounting, insurance, cost-benefit analysis,
and civil engineering, Porter shows that it is 'exactly
wrong' to interpret the drive for quantitative rigor as
inherent somehow in the activity of science except where
political and social pressures force compromise.
Instead, quantification grows from attempts to develop a
strategy of impersonality in response to pressures from
outside. Objectivity derives its impetus from cultural
contexts, quantification becoming most important where
elites are weak, where private negotiation is suspect,
and where trust is in short supply. |
|