Academia’s mathematical metaphysics are briefly explored en route to an elaboration of the qualitatively rigorous requirements underpinning the calibration and unambiguous interpretation of quantitative instrumentation in any science. Of particular interest are Gadamer’s emphases on number as the paradigm of the noetic, on the role of play in interpretation, and on Hegel’s sense of method as the activity of the thing itself that thought experiences. These point toward and overlap with (1) Latour’s study of the metrological social networks through which (...) technological phenomena are brought into language as modes of being that can be understood, and (2) the way that Rasch’s models for measurement comprise a potential beginning for metaphysically astute, qualitatively and quantitatively integrated, mathematical methods in the social sciences. The paper closes with observations on the general problem that is philosophy, the need to remain open to multiplicities of meaning even as clear understandings are sought and obtained. (shrink)

A public good has two defining properties: It is non-rivalrous: consumption of the good by one party does not reduce the ability of any other party to consume that good. It is non-excludable: it is not possible to prevent anyone from consuming it. The opposite of a public good is a private good. A private good has the following properties: Consumption of it is rivalrous: in as much as one person uses or consumes it, another person cannot use or consume (...) it. It is excludable: it is possible to exclude people from using it. The difference between private and public goods has implications for making decisions about who pays for them. The rivalrous property of a private good makes it desirable that the consumer of the good should be the one to pay for it; the excludable property of a private good makes it possible to charge the consumer for consuming it – if you don't pay then you will be excluded from having or using it. (shrink)