The article argues that cultural life sits in a 'high‑dimensional' space where shared, low‑dimensional descriptors and datasets rarely exist. That’s why humanities lean on metaphor, thick description, and local interpretation, while STEM and states prefer standard measures and systems. Attempts to force cultural questions into standardized metrics can miss what matters and distort coordination.
— It reframes fights over curricula, arts funding, measurement, and governance by cautioning that cultural policy built on rigid metrics can misfire in domains that are intrinsically high‑dimensional.
Robin Hanson
2025.09.20
100% relevant
Hanson’s contrast between STEM/state standardization (unique names, units, accounting) and culture’s 'floppy,' locally connected networks explains why cultural talk is qualitative and interpretive.
← Back to All Ideas