Department of Sociology, Philosophy and Anthropology, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4RJ, UK.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2021 Apr 26;43(2):62. doi: 10.1007/s40656-021-00415-5.
This article examines the relation between counting, counts and accountability. It does so by comparing the responses of the British government to deaths associated with Covid-19 in 2020 to its responses to deaths associated with the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Similarities and dissimilarities between the cases regarding what counted as data, what data were taken to count, what data counted for, and how data were counted provide the basis for considering how the bounds of democratic accountability are constituted. Based on these two cases, the article sets out the metaphors of leaks and cascades as ways of characterising the data practices whereby counts, counting and accountability get configured. By situating deaths associated with Covid-19 against previous experience with deaths from war, the article also proposes how claims to truth and ignorance might figure in any future official inquiry into the handling of the pandemic.
本文通过比较英国政府在 2020 年对与新冠病毒相关死亡的回应与 2003 年入侵伊拉克时对相关死亡的回应,考察了计数、计数物和问责制之间的关系。案例之间在哪些数据被视为数据、哪些数据被认为可以计数、哪些数据有意义以及如何计数等方面的相似点和不同点为考虑民主问责制的界限如何构成提供了基础。基于这两个案例,本文提出了“泄露”和“级联”这两个隐喻,用以描述计数、计数物和问责制配置的数据实践。通过将与新冠病毒相关的死亡与以往战争导致的死亡进行对比,本文还提出了在未来对大流行病处理情况进行任何官方调查时,如何考虑对真相和无知的主张。