Legibility: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{def|Legibility|/ˌlɛdʒɪˈbɪlɪti/|n|}} {{quote|I began to see legibility as a central problem in statecraft. The premodern.state was, in many crucial respects, par­tial...")
 
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{def|Legibility|/ˌlɛdʒɪˈbɪlɪti/|n|}}
{{def|Legibility|/ˌlɛdʒɪˈbɪlɪti/|n|}}
{{quote|I began to see legibility as a central problem in statecraft. The premodern.state was, in many crucial respects, par­tially blind; it knew precious little about its subjects, their wealth, their land-holdings and yields, their location, their very identity. It lacked anything like a detailed "map” of its terrain and its people. It lacked,for the most part, a measure, a metric, that would allow it to “trans­late" what it knew into a common standard necessary for a synoptic view. As a result, its interventions were often crude and self-defeating.
{{quote|I began to see legibility as a central problem in statecraft. The premodern.state was, in many crucial respects, par­tially blind; it knew precious little about its subjects, their wealth, their land-holdings and yields, their location, their very identity. It lacked anything like a detailed “map” of its terrain and its people. It lacked,for the most part, a measure, a metric, that would allow it to “trans­late” what it knew into a common standard necessary for a synoptic view. As a result, its interventions were often crude and self-defeating.
:—{{author|James C. Scott}}, {{br|Seeing Like a State}}}}
:—{{author|James C. Scott}}, {{br|Seeing Like a State}}}}



Revision as of 16:34, 31 December 2020

The Jolly Contrarian’s Dictionary
The snippy guide to financial services lingo.™


Dictionary.jpg

Index — Click ᐅ to expand:

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

Legibility /ˌlɛdʒɪˈbɪlɪti/ (n.)

I began to see legibility as a central problem in statecraft. The premodern.state was, in many crucial respects, par­tially blind; it knew precious little about its subjects, their wealth, their land-holdings and yields, their location, their very identity. It lacked anything like a detailed “map” of its terrain and its people. It lacked,for the most part, a measure, a metric, that would allow it to “trans­late” what it knew into a common standard necessary for a synoptic view. As a result, its interventions were often crude and self-defeating.

James C. Scott, Seeing Like a State

See also