Redrawing Boundaries Around the Self: The Case of Self-Quantifying Technologies

Chapter
Part of the Health, Technology and Society book series (HTE)

Abstract

Drawing on a 4-year ethnographic analysis of the ‘Quantified Self’, Dudhwala explores how personal medical devices (PMDs) in the form of self-quantifying technologies seem to be facilitating a new boundary around that which we would traditionally call the ‘self’ or the ‘body’. Dudhwala argues, using the sensibilities of science and technology studies, that rather than self-quantifying technologies reflecting a stable self, or body, already ‘out there’ waiting to be depicted through the data they produce, the self-quantifying technologies are an inextricable part of the multiple enactments of the self and the body and thus cannot be separated from the practices of using them.

References

  1. Austin, J. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham & London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barad, K. (2012). Intra-actions. Mousse, 34, 76–81.Google Scholar
  5. Barad, K. (2013). On touching-the inhuman that therefore I am. Differences, 23(3), 206–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohr, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 48, 696–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “Sex”. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Butler, J. (2010). Performative agency. Journal of Cultural Economy, 3(2), 147–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Butler, J. (2013). Acts and gender performative an essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), 519–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47, 777–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  13. Law, J., & Singleton, V. (2000). Performing technology’s stories: On social constructivism, performance, and performativity. Technology and Culture, 14(4), 765–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lupton, D. (2013). The digitally engaged patient: Self-monitoring and self-care in the digital health era. Social Theory & Health, 1–15.Google Scholar
  15. Lupton, D. (2014). Critical perspectives on digital health technologies. Sociology Compass, 8(12), 1344–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mialet, H. (2012). Hawking incorporated: Stephen Hawking and the anthropology of the knowing subject. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Swan, M. (2009). Emerging patient-driven health care models: An examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 6(2), 492–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wolf, G. (2011). ‘Quantified Sel’ | aether. Available at: http://aether.com/quantifiedself. Accessed November 3, 2011.
  19. Woolgar, S. (2014). Struggles with representation: Could it be otherwise? In C. Coopmans, J. Vertesi, M. Lynch, & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice revisited. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations