(m) fuster barutell
On integrity of data, 06/2019
By using data in specific works I am attempting to ground these on an objective and measurable truth. But how objective is the method of gathering data in reality? And what is the intrinsic truth value of data? And therefore, how true-to-concept are these works?
What we might perceive as a set metric varies depending on how we measure it, and with what instrument. Instruments which are fabricated to produce a sought-after result. A result, and therefore a data point, which not only fits within a paradigm, an inherently flexible framework, but is essentially anthropocentric. Furthermore, when dealing with data visualization software, artificial limits are imposed on raw data by the necessity to adhere to a threshold.
Taking this into consideration, what is the real value, if any, of an adamant attempt to maintain integrity in data display? Data deriving from physical properties is merely an anthropocentric measurement of one aspect of our physical reality, it is not reality after all but merely a descriptor. And as such, is not any description 'true' within a given frame of reference?
In the case of these specific works, where there are no moral consequences but merely a moral intention to uphold a 'truth', how adamant is suffice? As objectivity dissolves, using data to represent truth seems as valid as any other method available. Is being consequent in method sufficient? Perhaps in this context 'being consequent' is nothing more nor less than a direct simulation.