What do you think?
Rate this book
Limits of the Numerical: The Abuses and Uses of Quantification
This collection examines the uses of quantification in climate science, higher education, and health.
Numbers are both controlling and fragile. They drive public policy, figuring into everything from college rankings to vaccine efficacy rates. At the same time, they are frequent objects of obfuscation, manipulation, or outright denial. This timely collection by a diverse group of humanists and social scientists challenges undue reverence or skepticism toward quantification and offers new ideas about how to harmonize quantitative with qualitative forms of knowledge.
Limits of the Numerical focuses on quantification in several climate change; university teaching and research; and health, medicine, and well-being more broadly. This volume shows the many ways that qualitative and quantitative approaches can productively interact—how the limits of the numerical can be overcome through equitable partnerships with historical, institutional, and philosophical analysis. The authors show that we can use numbers to hold the powerful to account, but only when those numbers are themselves democratically accountable.
Numbers are both controlling and fragile. They drive public policy, figuring into everything from college rankings to vaccine efficacy rates. At the same time, they are frequent objects of obfuscation, manipulation, or outright denial. This timely collection by a diverse group of humanists and social scientists challenges undue reverence or skepticism toward quantification and offers new ideas about how to harmonize quantitative with qualitative forms of knowledge.
Limits of the Numerical focuses on quantification in several climate change; university teaching and research; and health, medicine, and well-being more broadly. This volume shows the many ways that qualitative and quantitative approaches can productively interact—how the limits of the numerical can be overcome through equitable partnerships with historical, institutional, and philosophical analysis. The authors show that we can use numbers to hold the powerful to account, but only when those numbers are themselves democratically accountable.
323 pages, Paperback
Published June 24, 2022
3 people are currently reading
55 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
November 6, 2023
The volume as whole is not spectacular - it lacks some coherence and some of the essays are quite weak - but the general project is interesting and there are a couple of very interesting essays.
Three of them are exemplary cases of applied, interdisciplinary philosophy, a rare but extremely commendable approach. These are John's (a great example of applied epistemological ethics), Alexandrova & Singh's (good use of philosophical reasoning to tackle a fundamental public policy issue), and Lusk's (a detailed case-discussion using of philosophy of science to uncover important ethical implications). Badano's essay is also somewhat interesting (had potential), and, finally, Mehta & Newfield's, though not philosophical, is also a not first bad jab at an extremely relevant topic (the Humanities' relevance and funding in universities).
Three of them are exemplary cases of applied, interdisciplinary philosophy, a rare but extremely commendable approach. These are John's (a great example of applied epistemological ethics), Alexandrova & Singh's (good use of philosophical reasoning to tackle a fundamental public policy issue), and Lusk's (a detailed case-discussion using of philosophy of science to uncover important ethical implications). Badano's essay is also somewhat interesting (had potential), and, finally, Mehta & Newfield's, though not philosophical, is also a not first bad jab at an extremely relevant topic (the Humanities' relevance and funding in universities).
November 17, 2024
While there are very helpful and powerful essays in this volume - such as the chapter by John on spurious precision, they do not feel like they add up to anything that helps to shape a shared terrain. For one thing, many of the contributions are no on the limits of the numerical but its importance. I appreciate the interdisciplinary aims but the essays are in such different registers and fields that it’s hard to sensitise to the motifs. For example, one chapter focuses on technical debates within climate modelling. It feels like the authors and editors could have done more to have an interdisciplinary reader in mind.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews