Statistics’ authority derived from studying deviance and mental states, not only measurement

Evidence

But statistics enjoyed its “distinctive reputation” as the “science of the state” not only because it claimed this authority. Its force also resided in its principal subject—the study of deviance, abnormal behavior, moeurs, and mental states. Referred to as “the mental science” and the “moral science,” respectively, in late-eighteenthand early nineteenth-century Britain and France, its practitioners sought “ratios of deviancy” (much as they did “laws of mortality”) that would both describe and prescribe thought and action. — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 604

Categorization

• DEFINE: Redefines ‘statistics’ as the science of deviance and moral states, not mere enumeration — a key reframing for colonial-state analysis.
• XREF: Challenges the standard Foucauldian narrative of censuses/cartography as rational measurement — connects to general arguments about the colonial archive. — connects to: Mathematical facts are true independently of human thought — G. H. Hardy, A Mathematician’s Apology, 264; The public sphere collapses when the public becomes a statistical artifact — James W. Carey, Communication as Culture- Essays on…, 647; The administrative cribbing of reports determined which event readings became evidence (+1 more)
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: how did ‘ratios of deviancy’ actually operationalize in specific colonial statistical tables vs. mortality tables?
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 604

Broader Connections

• The public sphere collapses when the public becomes a statistical artifact #expands (0.55) — James W. Carey, Communication as Culture- Essays on…, 647
• The administrative cribbing of reports determined which event readings became evidence #expands (0.50)
• Mathematical facts are true independently of human thought #contradicts (0.35) — G. H. Hardy, A Mathematician’s Apology, 264