Machine's Eye View: Postmodern Data Science and the Politics of Ground Truth

This paper advances the critical analysis of machine learning by placing it in direct relation with actuarial science as a way to further draw out their shared epistemic politics. The social studies of machine learning—along with work focused on other broad forms of algorithmic assessment, prediction, and scoring—tends to emphasize features of these systems that are decidedly actuarial in nature, and even deeply actuarial in origin. Yet, those technologies are almost never framed as actuarial and then fleshed out in that context or with that connection. Through discussions of the production of ground truth and politics of risk governance, I zero in on the bedrock relations of power-value-knowledge that are fundamental to, and constructed by, these technosciences and their regimes of authority and veracity in society. Analyzing both machine learning and actuarial science in the same frame gives us a unique vantage for understanding and grounding these technologies of governance. I conclude this theoretical analysis by arguing that contrary to their careful public performances of mechanical objectivity these technosciences are postmodern in their practices and politics.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science Technology & Human Values
Published
2025-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439251331138
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.37
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Machine's Eye View: Postmodern Data Science and the Politics of Ground Truth

Jathan Sadowski
1 citations
Science Technology & Human Values
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
article

Machine's Eye View: Postmodern Data Science and the Politics of Ground Truth

Jathan Sadowski
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This paper advances the critical analysis of machine learning by placing it in direct relation with actuarial science as a way to further draw out their shared epistemic politics. The social studies of machine learning—along with work focused on other broad forms of algorithmic assessment, prediction, and scoring—tends to emphasize features of these systems that are decidedly actuarial in nature, and even deeply actuarial in origin. Yet, those technologies are almost never framed as actuarial and then fleshed out in that context or with that connection. Through discussions of the production of ground truth and politics of risk governance, I zero in on the bedrock relations of power-value-knowledge that are fundamental to, and constructed by, these technosciences and their regimes of authority and veracity in society. Analyzing both machine learning and actuarial science in the same frame gives us a unique vantage for understanding and grounding these technologies of governance. I conclude this theoretical analysis by arguing that contrary to their careful public performances of mechanical objectivity these technosciences are postmodern in their practices and politics.

Science Technology & Human ValuesVol. 51(2)
Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute (AU), Monash University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.