4×8 (standards series), 2005
full-size truck bed liner, single sheet of drywall
(pdf)

For individuals not directly involved in science to have confidence in the reliability For individuals not directly involved in science to have confidence in the reliability and accuracy of the measurements made by scientists and metrologists, it is essential that instruments used within any local or national measuring system are calibrated, and that the calibration may be traced to an internationally accepted system of standards or reference materials. For example, that the weighing scales in a local supermarket are calibrated against national standard weights and that these standards are themselves calibrated against an international standard of mass. One can thus create a chain of calibrations, which allows the measurements in the supermarket to be traced to an internationally accepted and accredited set of standards. The consumer can therefore have confidence and trust in the local systems of weights and measures. A confidence that is reinforced when they are able to see that the weights and measures used in their own country are equivalent to the weights and measures used in other countries, and that all are based on a single international standard. – The International Bureau of Weights and Measures (1)

Being-in-the-world will stir questions about our capacity to make sense of things. As a measure of length, humans once used a “hand print.” This was a logical, recognizable, and universally available way to “make sense” of the world’s dimensions. The “hand” provided a marker for the community to use when making comparisons, judgments, and drawing conclusions. In this context things could be positioned in space and become points in time; all motivated by the idea that the measurement of a hand could lead to a world of less ambiguity.

To “measure against” would become symbolic of a societal push to make sense of the world. However, we know that human hands are not uniform in size. What was called a consensus became an error, or more accurately became fraud–that action that discovers its weakness and capitalizes on inaccuracy. To make reliable and predictable comparisons, the standard itself must be standardized. What seems to be a simple measurement becomes the most unreliable and untrustworthy of dimensions, flawed by definition, a unique contradiction of the concept of standardization.
Our fundamental reliance on the accuracy of these standards is a matter of trust, and gives us the tools with which we make order out of an otherwise chaotic world. Measurements and standards promote relationships. I will not speak of relationships without thinking of trust, reliability, confidence, or quality of life.

Humans safeguard their measurements. Prototypes of measurements are housed in vaults and protected by law. International committees campaign for uniformity. The human concept of standardization may be most clearly explained in a military context: The development and implementation of concepts, doctrines, procedures and designs to achieve and maintain the required levels of compatibility, interchangeability or commonality in the operational, procedural, materiel, technical and administrative fields to attain interoperability. (2)
Why and how is it that standards define our understanding of being-in-the-world? When does it become apparent that the standards we produce altar our personal relationships? Relationships defined by trust, reliability, confidence, and quality of life.

1. “Introduction.” The International Bureau of Weights and Measures. 10 Nov. 2005 <http://www.bipm.fr/en/home/>
2. “Standardization.” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 5 November 2005, 10 Nov. 2005 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardization>.