Philosophy & Technology

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 243–248

On the Peculiarity of Standards: A Reply to Thompson

Commentary
  • 102 Downloads

Abstract

As Paul B. Thompson suggests in his recent seminal paper, “‘There’s an App for That’: Technical Standards and Commodification by Technological Means,” technical standards restructure property (and other social) relations. He concludes with the claim that the development of technical standards of commodification can serve purposes with bad effects such as “the rise of the factory system and the deskilling of work” or progressive effects such as how “technical standards for animal welfare… discipline the unwanted consequences of market forces.” In this reply, we want to append several points to his argument and suggest that he rightly points out that standards can promote various goods; however, there are peculiar powers wielded by standardization processes that might profitably be unpacked more systematically than Thompson's article seems to suggest. First, the concealment of the technopolitics around standards is largely due to their peculiar ontological status as recipes for reality. Second, technical standards can and do commit violence against persons, but such violence is often suffered not in the formation of class consciousness, as Marx might have put it, but as a failure to conform to the laws of nature.

Keywords

Standards Network power Commodification Technology ethics 

References

  1. Augé, M. (1986). Un Ethnologue dans le Metro. Paris, France: Hachette.Google Scholar
  2. Bain, C. (2010). Structuring the Flexible and Feminized Labor Market: GlobalGAP Standards for Agricultural Labor in Chile. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 35(2), 343–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Busch, L. (2011). Standards: recipes for reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Coles, J. V. (1932). Standardization of consumers' goods: an aid to consumer-buying. New York: Ronald Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dreger, A. D. (1998). Hermaphrodites and the medical invention of sex. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Epstein, S. (2007). Inclusion: the politics of difference in medical research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Evans, J., Rich, E., Davies, B., & Allwood, R. (2008). Education, disordered eating and obesity discourse. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  10. Hill, L. (1990). Grain grades and standards: historical issues shaping the future. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hoover, H. (1937 [1924]). “Moral standards in an industrial era.” In R. Wilbur, A. Hyde (Eds.) The Hoover Policies (pp. 300–305). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
  12. Hoyt, H. (1919). Standardization and its relation to industrial concentration. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 82, 271–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hudson, R. (1928). Organized effort in simplification. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 137, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kula, W. (1986). Measures and men. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Loya, T., & Boli, J. (1999). Standardization in the World Polity: Technical Rationality over Power. In J. Boli & G. Thomas (Eds.), Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations since 1875 (pp. 169–197). Stanford: Stanford Unversity Press.Google Scholar
  16. Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  17. National Industrial Conference Board. (1929). Industrial standardization. New York: National Industrial Conference Board.Google Scholar
  18. Office of Technology Assessment. (1992). Global standards: building blocks for the future. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  19. Pargman, D., & Palme, J. (2009). ASCII Imperialism. In M. Lampland & S. L. Star (Eds.), Standards and their stories: how quantifying, classifying, and formalizing practices shape everyday life (pp. 177–199). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Perry, J. (1955). The story of standards. New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company.Google Scholar
  21. Russell, A. (2005). Standardization in history: a review essay with an eye to the future. In S. Bolin (Ed.), The standards edge: future generations (pp. 247–260). Ann Arbor, MI: Sheridan Press.Google Scholar
  22. Thompson, P. B. (2011). “There’s an app for that”: technical standards and commodification by technological means. Philosophy & Technology. doi:10.1007/s13347-011-0029-4.
  23. Veblen, T. (1904). The theory of business enterprise. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations