Re: [-empyre-] is data ever neutral?

[Brett Stalbaum <beestal@cadre.sjsu.edu>]

The message to follow will contain an excerpt from an essay that I wrote
last year. The writing was my attempt to draw an outline of C5's thinking
on the problem of landscape data and performance. One of my particular
goals was to draw connections between the theory work of Joel Slayton and
Geri Wittig, and relate these to some of the traditional aesthetic issues
still facing computer artists. It is also an outline of C5's thinking,
informing our ongoing work in the landscape.
(http://www.c5corp.com/projects/landscape/index.shtml) The C5 Landscape
Projects are planned performance experiments that utilize data mining as
well as real time processing and performance control/mediation in the
field. Many field experiments have been implemented at this time as we
continue to develop software and strategize implementations of hardware.
In June we will spend 3 days on Mount Shasta, training for larger
geological structures and rolling some new experiements.

I think the excerpt goes to the discussion of the 'neutrality' of data
which has been a topic on this list; a topic which explicitly indexes the
question of the potential veracity or truth of data. Under this
assumption, data is presumed to behave well under processing and
semantically as language, even if the ideology behind its collection and
processing can be called into question. We may indeed ask if data is
accurate or not, but this already entails some significant assumptions
about the nature of data. In C5, we have been trying to look below
ideology to deal with ontology first, and we suspect that the mechanisms
through which data can be said to express veracity may not always involve
the operational transparency that many assume. I should note that we don't
deny ideology, btw. (I'd very much like to preempt the typical complaints
against us - my salute to the critique of the machine, and all that.)
But we do view ontological research as a first order problem for analysis,
much as the tradition of analytic aesthetics starts with definition and
builds upon that for interpretation and evaluation... anyway, text to
follow.

On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Kate Richards wrote:

> Of course 'data' is not neutral - the scientific provenance is very evident
> in the ways in which 'data' is conceived in order to substantiate a thesis.
> Nevertheless it is interesting to reflect on the motivations for data
> collection and data mining, and of course the techniques for doing this.
>
> Thus a social scientist might determine that 10 particular datasets will
> illustrate and prove/disprove his/her thesis that, for example, a city state
> provides a 'developed' standard of living.
>
> The data sets conceived, collected and mapped by the scientist (eg number of
> children per soccer coach; extent of electricity flow across 24 hours; scope
> of excavated cultural heritage) could be very imaginative. In the best
> scenario, the data sets reflect back on and illuminate aspects of the
> thesis, helping us understand the subjectivity and the specificity of the
> thesis. data sets from differant eras can be used together to highlight
> comparisions across time.
>
> In the worst scenarios the data is used as evidence of a fallacious or
> politically motivated thesis, and of course is conceived, collected and
> visualised in ways that fully support that thesis.
>
> The standard criticisms of scientific method can be brought to bear on these
> processes - neither thesis, nor methodology, nor 'results' can be fully
> seperated out from the imaginative, political or financial imperatives of
> the cartographer.
>
> Kate
>
> > From: Patrick Lichty <voyd@voyd.com>
> > Reply-To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 13:27:14 -0500
> > To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > Subject: Re: [-empyre-] is data ever neutral?
> >
> >
> >> data is gathered in certain ways, for certain intents, by certain gatherers,
> >> the software is never neutral..it has an inherent signature and bias of the
> >> person who wrote  it.. key strokes input into a key board are never neutral
> >> they have a rhythm of the user..   we are never objective , never have an
> >> uncompromised overview.. yet data tries to trick us to  think we do.
> >
> > Well, the earliest metaphor for the neutrality of tools, technologies or
> > codes of any sort id the Thamusian question of language.  The problem is
> > that given any device's constriction, purpose and context, there can be no
> > neutrality.  In the case of data, I think M has it spot on in regards to
> > methods of gathering, structuring, and representation.  Lest we forget the
> > technologies, the sociocultural contexts that drive them such as access,
> > wealth, education, etc., as well of the purpose. However. to delve deepen
> > here is another whole thread, and I would begin to rave on a bit about Lang.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>