If sociology is ‘missing’ from the Aadhaar debate, to take Reetika Khera’s provocation seriously, the absence may reflect a disciplinary reluctance to accede to normative terms of contest in which the biometric identity platform must be rendered as boon or blight. Though a refusal of such normative formulations may be necessary, it carries its own ethical limit. Beyond the question of normative assessment, Aadhaar raises multiple additional questions. Several are noted here, questions on Aadhaar as regime of de-duplication; on database as emergent social imaginary; on the immateriality of Aadhaar; and on the collapse of welfare, wage, credit and product into ‘service’ as the emergent form of value.

中文翻译：

---

印度作为数据库

如果 Aadhaar 辩论中“缺失”了社会学，认真对待 Reetika Khera 的挑衅，这种缺失可能反映了纪律性不愿加入竞赛的规范条款，在这种竞赛中，生物识别平台必须被渲染为福音或枯萎。虽然拒绝这种规范性表述可能是必要的，但它有其自身的道德限制。除了规范性评估的问题之外，Aadhaar 还提出了多个其他问题。这里提到了几个，关于 Aadhaar 作为重复数据删除机制的问题；作为新兴社会想象的数据库；关于 Aadhaar 的非物质性；以及福利、工资、信用和产品崩溃为“服务”作为价值的新兴形式。