Statistics are not reality, but they are a map to reality, and that map is central to the basic knowledge necessary for modern government. At least as Michel Foucault argues: Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at French Universities, 1977-1978. (Edited by Michel Senerard, translated by Graham Burchell, first published 2004, English translation published 2007). For example, he claims: „His knowledge of the things that constitute the very reality of a nation is precisely what was then called „statistics.'' Etymologically, statistics is knowledge about a nation, the forces and resources that characterize it at a particular moment in time. ”
This is a passage from Foucault's lecture on March 15, 1978. Tip: I learned about this essay from a post on LinkedIn by Noah Williams of the University of Miami. The last time I read Foucault, I never got this deep into his writings!)
(A) What do we need to know in order to govern, rather than at the content level? I think we're seeing an important phenomenon here, an essential change. In the image, expression, and art of government defined by the early seventeenth century, the sovereign had to be essentially prudent and prudent. What does it mean to be smart? Smart means knowing the law. This means knowing the positive laws of the land, the natural laws that apply to all human beings, and of course the commandments of God himself. Being wise meant knowing historical examples and models of virtue and taking them as a guide to behavior. On the other hand, the sovereign had to be prudent, that is, he had to know how much, when and in what circumstances this wisdom should be applied in practice. For example, when should the laws of justice be strictly applied, or rather when should principles of equity take precedence over formal rules of justice? Wisdom and prudence, the ability to deal with the law.
I think that in the early 17th century a completely different description of the knowledge required of a ruler appeared. What a sovereign, or one who rules, or a sovereign, must know insofar as he rules, is not just the law, nor even the basic or basic law (of course, one always refers to the law). (and they need to know). What I think is new and crucial and crucial is that the sovereign must know what constitutes the state…that is, the ruler must maintain the state in its strength or in its necessary state. This means that we must know the elements that make it possible. To develop that strength so that it does not become dominated by others or lose its strength and relative strength and cease to exist. In other words, the knowledge necessary for the sovereign (Savoie) becomes knowledge (reconnaissance) This knowledge, which is not knowledge of laws but knowledge of things, and which constitutes the very reality of the state, is exactly what was then called „statistics.“ Etymologically, statistics is knowledge about a nation, the forces and resources that characterize it at a particular moment in time. For example, knowledge about population, measures of its quantity, mortality and birth rates. Calculation of different categories of individuals and their wealth in a nation. An assessment of the potential wealth available to states, mines, forests, etc. The valuation of the wealth in circulation, the balance of trade, the measurement of the effects of taxes and customs duties, all these data, and more, now constitute the important content of the knowledge of the sovereign. Therefore, it is no longer a collection of laws or a skill in applying laws to suit necessity, but a body of technical knowledge that describes the reality of the state itself.
Walter Walter O'Leary, a managing partner at South Point Capital and a colleague of Noah Williams at the University of Miami, pointed to the origin of the term „statistics from statistics.“ Online etymology dictionary:
1770, “The science of dealing with data concerning the state of nations or communities” (Barnhardt), from German statisticsThe term was popularized and probably coined by the German political scientist Gottfried Achenwall (1719-1772) in his writings. „Government of the Federal Republic of Switzerland“ (1748), from modern Latin Statistics (university) “Lectures on national politics” (from Italian) statistician From Latin „a person skilled in politics“ situation „station, position, place. order, arrangement, condition“, figuratively „public order, community organization“, noun of action from past participle stem stare „Stand“ (from PIE route) *Star- „to stand, make, or be firm“).
The OED notes that „the context shows that[Achenwall]did not consider the term novel,“ but current use of the term appears to date back to him. Sir John Sinclair is credited with introducing it into English usage.
The broader meaning of „numerical data of any kind systematically collected and classified“ dates from 1829. Thus every subject will be studied by extensive enumeration.Shortened form statistics Recorded by 1961.
The early concept of statistics as national strategy is (of course) appealing to me. In fact, it helped me crystallize a form of my dissatisfaction with the way modern politics is often conducted. I would probably be uncomfortable with the government being run by economists and other technocrats. But I would like to feel that the majority of politicians have more than a fleetingly outdated knowledge of the statistics that provide a map of the „powers and resources that characterize a nation at a particular moment.“ Masu.