The moral imperative of being data driven

There’s a (modern, in my experience) sentiment that being data — driven is “bad”. The arguments being:

• Data, models, and approximations can never capture the full story.
• Reducing everything to numbers strips away the human element.

These points are true, in a sense.

Models and approximations are useful precisely because they acknowledge that the world is too complex to capture in its entirety. In fact, the value of data is in its ability to simplify the overwhelming number of variables we face, allowing us to focus on solving specific dimensions of problems. By measuring & calculating, we narrow down the variables and zone in on actionable insights.

This is how humanity has made advancements — through models and approximations, we’ve built everything from medicine to technology, acknowledging that perfection isn’t the goal, but improvement is.

Stripping away the ‘human element’ is a feature, not a bug. The human element is often vague and subjective, leading to emotional responses that can cloud judgment. By removing it, we allow ourselves to clearly see the effects of different paths, choosing the one that works best — not because it “feels right”, but because it is right. A common example is criminal justice reform: data — driven approaches have shown to be far more effective in reducing crime rates than emotion — based policies driven by outrage.

In the end, being data — driven and measuring things is an exercise in seeking truth. How do you make claims, pass judgments, or say something is true without any concrete detail or evidence? Without data, we’re left with empty opinions, but by measuring, we root ourselves in reality and truth.