Knowledge from Pebbles
What Can Be Counted, and What Cannot
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 2689179 |
|---|---|
| Authors | David Nirenberg (University of Chicago), Ricardo Nirenberg (University at Albany, State University of New York) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 1-13 |
| Publication date | 2018-03-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | BOOK |
| Venue | KNOW: A Journal on the Formation of Knowledge (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2473-599X • E-ISSN: 2473-6007 |
| Publisher | University of Chicago Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1086/696970 |
| OpenAlex | W2791622219 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
This article explores the historical and philosophical implications of counting and measuring, contrasting the tangible and quantifiable with the intangible and immeasurable. Using the metaphor of pebbles representing countable units, the authors examine how different cultures and systems of thought have approached the problem of representing knowledge and reality. They trace the development of counting systems from ancient civilizations to modern science, highlighting the limitations and biases inherent in different approaches. The article argues that while quantification is essential for certain forms of knowledge, it cannot fully capture the complexities of human experience and understanding. It emphasizes the importance of recognizing the limits of what can be counted and the value of qualitative and interpretive approaches to knowledge
Confusion · Curiosity · Rumor · Philosophy and History of Science
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |