The term – and accompanying movement – the Quantified Self was first proposed back in 2007. Now there are rumblings of its inverse: the ‘Unquantified Self’. Explored in a recent Dazed article by Rachael Akhidenor, it is an explicit move away from data towards the visceral, physical cues the body can provide without tech.
Tracking, counting and measuring are not new health behaviours, but they have come to dominate the wellness conversation in recent years. As quantification has become increasingly accessible, the prevailing mentality has been that to track is to win. Now, a rejection of optimisation is taking shape, with people instead pursuing more intuitive forms of wellness: listening to their bodies and minds, and interpreting what they feel rather than what the data tells them.
The backlash to optimisation has been brewing for some time, with opponents suggesting that, rather than promoting healthier habits, constant tracking can fuel anxiety, negatively affect sleep and disguise harmful relationships with diet and body image. It tipped into the zeitgeist recently with the dissection of Stephen Bartlett’s WHOOP-evidenced lament that three glasses of wine wreaked three days of havoc on his otherwise meticulously optimised life. That particular debate aside, the response revealed a broader fatigue with the relentless pressure to become the best possible version of yourself.
The tension for brands is how to genuinely foster intuitive wellbeing, which, by design, needs little intervention. The answer already exists; consumers have long called for brands to share their resources – expertise, space, funding – something sports brands have done through grassroots programmes, free training, and investment in community facilities. Nike and Palace’s Manor Place hub for football, skating and community is one example; Stormzy and adidas’ #MerkyFC HQ is another. They work because they celebrate the activities people already love, rather than inventing new definitions of what wellbeing is supposed to look like.
