Data modernism: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:


===Data ''modernism''? Or ''post''-modernism?===
===Data ''modernism''? Or ''post''-modernism?===
An initial objection: in Moses’ classical high-modernist view there is a central, top-down, beneficent dictator who has, in good faith, derived a theory from deterministic first principles; a sort of [[cogito ergo sum]] begets [[income tax and rice pudding]] begets a mechanised [[High modernist|modernist]] way of life. Data modernism dispenses with the need for the beneficent dictator, or at any rate yields that position to a more or less ineffable ''[[algorithm]]''. We don’t know how it works, how it gets to its conclusions, but we are fixed with the conviction that, being the massed output of the wise crowd, it has greater intelligence than any one of us.
An initial objection: in James C. Scott’s classic account of [[high-modernism]]<ref>{{Br|Seeing Like A State}}</ref> there is a top-down, beneficent, controlling human mind of some kind with a pre-existing theory of the game. That central intelligence has derived a theory from deterministic first principles; a sort of [[cogito ergo sum]] begets [[income tax and rice pudding]] begets a mechanised [[High modernist|modernist]] way of life. The housing project, or five-year plan, or Ministry of Truth is an implementation of that pre-existing theory.
 
“Data modernism” the controlling human mind does a different job: it no longer needs a pre-existing theory of the game: it delegates — or, at any rate, ''yields'' — that responsibility to a more or less ineffable ''[[algorithm]]''. the “controlling mind” need not know how, in the particular case, the algorithm works, how it gets to its conclusions, and is fixed with the conviction that, being the summed and filtered output of the collected [[wisdom of the crowd]], the algorithm has a greater intelligence than any “single controlling” mind anyway.




Navigation menu