We live in an age of optimization. From step-counting goals to standardized test scores, we increasingly define success through easily quantifiable metrics. This isn’t accidental; it’s a fundamental shift in how we approach values. While abstract concepts like wisdom or community remain desirable, the modern world runs on mechanical values – explicit, measurable objectives that prioritize coordination and comparison above all else. But this relentless focus on the countable comes at a cost.
The Philosophy of Rules
The core problem isn’t just that mechanical values feel shallow. It’s that they represent a specific type of rule – one that prioritizes algorithmic precision over human judgment. Historian Lorraine Daston identifies three distinct conceptions of rules: principles, models, and algorithms. Principles are flexible guidelines, meant to be applied with discretion (like “show, don’t tell” in creative writing). Models rely on emulation, requiring understanding and context (“What would Jesus do?”). Algorithms, however, demand blind adherence, eliminating nuance entirely.
This algorithmic approach didn’t emerge with computers. It was driven by a 19th-century need to cheapen labor. By replacing skilled workers with standardized procedures, corporations and governments could hire unskilled labor and ensure consistent, auditable results.
From Principles to Algorithms: The Case of Recipes
Consider cooking. Older recipes relied on judgment (“beat 2-3 eggs until workable”), while modern recipes demand precision (“add 2 cups of broth, simmer for 30 minutes”). This shift isn’t merely about convenience; it’s about control.
The key to understanding this is that the old way is messy but real, whereas the new way is precise but artificial. The chef who refuses to look at the temperature gauge understands this perfectly. He doesn’t want to get fixated on one number while ignoring the complex interaction of variables that truly determine the quality of his pizza.
The Cost of Engineered Accessibility
The downside of algorithmic precision is subtle but profound: it devalues expertise and promotes replaceability. When success is defined solely by measurable outputs, individuals become interchangeable parts in a system designed for maximum efficiency.
This isn’t just about labor; it extends to every aspect of life.
When we adopt mechanical values, we make ourselves perfectly replaceable—in valuing and judging what’s important. The more we prioritize quantifiable achievements, the less we value the unquantifiable qualities that make life meaningful.
In conclusion, the rise of mechanical values is a defining feature of the modern world. While they offer efficiency and coordination, they also threaten to strip away the nuance, judgment, and human connection that truly matter. The choice is ours: continue optimizing for the measurable, or reclaim the messy, unpredictable essence of what it means to be human.
