Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Materiality

Materiality is a central in the , social sciences, and , referring to the active role of physical , objects, and substances in shaping social relations, cultural practices, and human experiences, rather than viewing them merely as passive backdrops for human action. It emphasizes the entanglement between the material and immaterial worlds, where physical properties of artifacts and environments influence , , and meaning-making processes. In and studies, materiality explores how objects participate in social life, often through themes of —where everyday items become overlooked—and , where materials reveal power structures, such as in discussions of , , or . This perspective draws from new materialisms and actor-network theory, positing that nonhuman entities, like plastics in oceanic ecosystems, exert by gathering actors and transforming through ecological and social interactions. Beyond the humanities, materiality holds distinct meanings in professional fields. In , it denotes the threshold at which an omission or misstatement in could reasonably the decisions of users, guiding what must be disclosed to ensure transparency and reliability. For instance, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission defines a matter as material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable would consider it important in making choices. In , particularly securities and contexts, materiality assesses the of or in affecting legal outcomes, such as whether a fact could sway a decision-maker's . These applications underscore materiality's broader utility as a for evaluating and impact across disciplines.

Philosophy and Ontology

Core Concepts

In ontology, material substances denote entities that exhibit tangible, physical existence, characterized by composition from and possession of spatial extension and perceptible , in opposition to immaterial entities such as abstract ideas or spiritual forms that lack such physical . This distinction underscores the foundational divide in between the , sensible world and the realm of pure or ideality, where material beings are subject to change, division, and empirical observation. Discussions of the ontology of matter in Western philosophy trace prominently to Aristotle's doctrine of hylomorphism, articulated in his Physics and Metaphysics, which posits that all physical substances are composites of matter (hylē), the underlying potentiality or "stuff" capable of receiving form, and form (morphē), the actualizing principle that organizes and defines the matter's structure or function. Aristotle developed hylomorphism to resolve puzzles of change and substance, arguing that neither matter nor form alone constitutes a complete entity; instead, their union explains the persistence of identity amid transformation, such as a seed becoming a tree through the imposition of biological form on organic matter. This framework profoundly influenced subsequent Western thought, from medieval scholasticism—where thinkers like Thomas Aquinas adapted it to reconcile faith and reason—to modern metaphysics, laying groundwork for understanding the role of matter in natural beings, which informs contemporary concepts of materiality. A pivotal refinement of the material-immaterial distinction emerged in René Descartes' substance dualism, outlined in his Meditations on First Philosophy, where material substances are defined by extension in space, divisibility, and mechanical properties, while immaterial substances, exemplified by the mind or soul, are characterized by thought, indivisibility, and independence from physical dimensions. Descartes argued for their real distinction through clear and distinct perceptions: the mind's capacity for doubt and self-awareness reveals it as non-extended, contrasting with the body's evident corporeality, thus grounding the immortality of the soul and a mechanistic view of the physical world. For instance, a bronze statue exemplifies a material entity, its composition arising from the extended matter shaped by form, whereas mathematical abstractions like geometric points or numbers remain immaterial, existing independently of physical instantiation. In , the of materiality extends these classical ideas through new materialisms, which emphasize the active of in shaping social and cultural processes. Thinkers like Jane Bennett argue that entities, such as electrical grids or waste, exert influence and participate in political ecologies, challenging anthropocentric views by highlighting 's vitality and relational entanglements. Similarly, Karen Barad's draws on quantum physics to propose that is performative, emerging through intra-actions that blur subject-object divides, thus reconfiguring to include ethical and epistemological dimensions of materiality. These approaches connect historical ontologies of to modern understandings of materiality as entangled with human and , without reducing to traditional substance .

Relation to Philosophical Materialism

Philosophical materialism posits that all phenomena, including and mental states, ultimately arise from interactions among material entities, rejecting any independent realm of non-material substances or ideals. This view asserts the objective reality of as the fundamental substance from which everything else derives, with immaterial aspects like thoughts or spirits being either illusions or emergent products of physical processes—distinct from but related to the concept of materiality as 's active properties. The foundations of materialism trace back to ancient Greek atomism, developed by Democritus and Leucippus in the 5th century BCE, which proposed that the universe consists solely of indivisible, eternal atoms differing only in shape, size, and arrangement, moving randomly in an infinite void to produce all observable diversity without invoking divine or supernatural causes. In the 19th century, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels advanced dialectical materialism, integrating Hegelian dialectics with a materialist ontology to argue that historical progress and social structures emerge from contradictions in material production and economic conditions, rather than ideas or ideals. Contemporary physicalism represents the modern evolution of materialism, maintaining that everything in the universe is either physical or supervenes on the physical, meaning non-physical properties depend entirely on underlying physical facts without causal independence. Central debates within materialism revolve around reductionism and emergentism. Reductionism claims that higher-level phenomena, such as consciousness, can be fully explained as identical to or strictly determined by lower-level physical processes, like neural activity in the brain, allowing for a complete scientific reduction of the mental to the material. In contrast, emergentism acknowledges that while all entities are composed of material parts, complex interactions at higher levels produce novel properties—such as qualia or intentionality—that are irreducible to their components and exhibit downward causal influence, challenging strict reduction without abandoning 's core commitment to matter. Materialism has faced significant criticisms from , particularly George Berkeley's immaterialism, which argues that material objects lack independent existence and are merely collections of ideas perceived by minds, rendering incoherent because it posits unperceivable substrata underlying sensory qualities. Berkeley contended that to speak of matter as an unseen cause of perceptions is meaningless, as all knowledge derives from ideas, thus inverting by prioritizing mind over matter. Furthermore, poses challenges to classical materialist conceptions of matter as solid, deterministic particles, introducing probabilistic wave functions, superposition, and non-local entanglement that blur the boundaries of locality and observability, prompting some philosophers to question whether traditional adequately accounts for these non-intuitive physical realities.

Accounting and Auditing

Materiality Principle

The in serves as a fundamental guideline for determining whether financial information is significant enough to require disclosure in , ensuring that reports provide a true and fair view without overwhelming users with insignificant details. At its core, information is considered if its omission or misstatement could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users relying on those . This definition, aligned across major standards, emphasizes the principle's role in enhancing the relevance and reliability of financial reporting by focusing on decision-useful information. The concept of materiality has roots in 19th-century auditing practices in , where it emerged in investigative audits through considerations of account accuracy and agreements on significance levels between auditors and clients, evolving from early practices in trade and commerce. It was later formalized in authoritative standards, such as the Standards Board's (FASB) Concepts Statement No. 8, which integrates materiality into the qualitative characteristics of information, and the Accounting Standards Board's (IASB) IAS 1, which requires entities to present material information while omitting immaterial details. These frameworks underscore that materiality judgments must be entity-specific and context-dependent, applied throughout the preparation and auditing of . Materiality encompasses both qualitative and quantitative aspects, meaning it is not determined solely by numerical thresholds but also by the nature and circumstances of the . For instance, even a small misstatement may be material if it involves , illegal acts, or hides a significant change in earnings trends, as such items could alter user perceptions regardless of size. In contrast, quantitative factors assess magnitude relative to totals, but qualitative considerations often take precedence when the item's implications extend beyond mere numbers, such as potential impacts on or . Representative examples illustrate this distinction: the omission of a major pending that could result in substantial financial penalties would typically be due to its potential to influence decisions, whereas minor errors in expense accounts, unlikely to affect overall assessments, would not require . Similarly, a small illegal might become if it risks triggering regulatory scrutiny or litigation, highlighting how qualitative factors can elevate otherwise insignificant amounts. This balanced approach ensures remain concise yet informative.

Assessing Materiality Levels

In and auditing, materiality levels are quantitatively benchmarked using rules of thumb to establish initial thresholds for misstatements that could influence users' decisions. Common benchmarks include 5% of pretax , 1% of total assets, and 1% of net sales or , serving as starting points for auditors to gauge the magnitude of potential errors. However, authoritative guidance cautions against rigid adherence to these percentages, as they must be contextualized with qualitative considerations to avoid understating the impact of smaller misstatements that alter trends or . Auditors apply two interrelated materiality concepts: planning materiality and performance materiality. Planning materiality represents the overall threshold for the as a whole, used to determine the scope and nature of procedures based on preliminary financial , such as estimated . In contrast, performance materiality is set at a lower level—typically 50% to 75% of planning materiality—to apply to specific account balances, classes of transactions, and disclosures, thereby minimizing the risk that undetected misstatements aggregate to exceed the overall materiality threshold. This distinction ensures audits focus on high-risk areas while providing reasonable assurance against material misstatement. Several factors shape the assessment of materiality levels, including the entity's size, which often correlates with higher absolute thresholds for larger organizations; industry norms, such as using asset-based benchmarks in capital-intensive sectors; and regulatory requirements like guidelines emphasizing a "reasonable " perspective. Professional judgment integrates these with qualitative elements, such as the potential for misstatements to affect , management compensation, or management, ensuring the threshold reflects the entity's unique profile. Risk-based approaches form the core tools for materiality assessment, where auditors evaluate risks of material misstatement at the financial statement and assertion levels to tailor procedures accordingly, adjusting the extent of testing based on identified vulnerabilities. Materiality levels are not static; they may be revised during the audit if new information—such as significant transactions or economic shifts—alters the preliminary benchmarks, prompting reevaluation to maintain audit effectiveness. These adjustments align with standards requiring ongoing professional skepticism. The illustrates the perils of flawed materiality assessments involving entities. In November 2001, Enron restated its 1997–2000 , adding $591 million in losses and $628 million in debt from special purpose entities previously deemed immaterial by the company and auditor , which had allowed these vehicles to conceal massive liabilities and inflate reported earnings. This failure underscored the need for robust qualitative analysis in evaluating the economic substance of such structures beyond quantitative thresholds.

Law

Material Facts in Litigation

In litigation, a material fact is defined as information that would affect the rights, duties, or obligations of the parties involved in a case or transaction, possessing the capacity to influence a reasonable decision-maker's judgment on the outcome. This standard ensures that only facts with legal significance are considered in resolving disputes, distinguishing them from trivial or irrelevant details that do not alter the case's trajectory. The determination of materiality is objective, focusing on whether the fact has a natural tendency to impact the proceeding, rather than its actual influence in a specific instance. A key application of material facts occurs in summary judgment motions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, where judgment shall be granted if the movant shows there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Material facts are those that might affect the outcome of the suit under governing law, with disputes viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. In evidence law, materiality forms a core component of relevance, governing the admissibility of evidence in both civil and criminal proceedings. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 401, evidence qualifies as relevant if it has any tendency to make a material fact—that is, a fact of consequence in determining the action—more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. This rule integrates materiality with probative value, eliminating the need for separate proof of a fact's legal import while requiring that the evidence relate to issues central to the claims or defenses. Courts apply this test liberally at the outset, though subsequent rules may exclude relevant evidence on grounds like prejudice or hearsay. The concept of material facts in litigation traces its roots to traditions, where admissibility required proof that the offered facts were legally pertinent to the dispute, separate from their logical probative force. Over time, this evolved into a unified standard in modern codifications like the , adopted in 1975, which deliberately omitted explicit references to "materiality" to avoid ambiguity while retaining its essence as "facts of consequence." Illustrative examples abound in contract and tort contexts. In contract disputes, an undisclosed material defect—such as latent structural flaws in sold property—can vitiate consent and support claims of or , as it undermines the parties' mutual understanding of the bargain. Similarly, in tort actions, concealed risks impacting the , like hidden environmental hazards on that foreseeably cause injury, elevate nondisclosure to , obligating the responsible party to warn or mitigate. These applications underscore how materiality filters facts to focus judicial inquiry on elements capable of swaying or remedies.

Materiality in Securities Regulation

In , materiality serves as a cornerstone for prohibiting fraudulent practices under Section 10(b) of the , which bans the use of any manipulative or deceptive device in connection with the purchase or sale of securities. Rule 10b-5, promulgated by the under this section, specifically prohibits material misstatements or omissions of material facts that render statements misleading. The concept ensures investor protection by requiring disclosure of information that could influence investment decisions, thereby promoting market integrity and fairness. The prevailing materiality standard was established by the U.S. in TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc. (1976), which defined an omitted fact as material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable would consider it important in deciding whether to buy, sell, or hold securities. This "reasonable " test was extended to Section 10(b) claims in Basic Inc. v. Levinson (1988), where the Court emphasized that materiality turns on whether the would significantly alter the "total mix" of information available to . In the context of merger discussions, for instance, preliminary negotiations may be material if they carry a reasonable probability of fruition and represent a significant event for the company, as assessed probabilistically rather than through rigid bright-line rules. Internationally, similar principles underpin regulations like the European Union's (EU) No 596/2014, which prohibits the disclosure or use of inside information—defined as precise, non-public information likely to have a significant effect on the prices of financial instruments if made public. Unlike the U.S. focus on the reasonable investor's perspective, MAR emphasizes potential price impact as the materiality threshold for inside information, aiming to prevent abuse through timely public disclosure. Illustrative cases highlight the application of these standards. In Basic Inc. v. Levinson, the ruled that Basic's public denials of ongoing merger talks constituted material omissions under Section 10(b), as they misled investors about potential corporate developments, leading to liability for . Similarly, in SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. (1968), insiders' non-disclosure of a major mineral discovery—deemed material due to its potential to substantially affect stock prices—resulted in violations, with the court imposing disgorgement of profits and injunctions. Violations under U.S. law can incur civil penalties up to three times the profit gained or loss avoided, plus criminal fines and , while MAR breaches may lead to administrative fines up to €5 million for individuals and up to €15 million or 15% of total annual turnover (whichever is higher) for legal entities.

Art and Design

Material Properties in Creation

In art, materiality refers to the physical substances and inherent qualities of the mediums employed in creation, such as , , and color, which actively shape the aesthetic, conceptual, and sensory dimensions of the artwork. These properties extend beyond mere support for artistic expression; they influence how viewers perceive and interact with the piece, evoking emotional responses and conveying meaning through tactile and visual cues. For instance, the of clay allows for malleable during sculpting, while the of paints ensures , and the vibrancy of pigments alters perceptual depth. In substrates, materiality manifests through simulated s and colors on screens, mimicking physical qualities to bridge and tangible experiences. Historical examples illustrate how artists have leveraged these material properties to advance creative processes. During the , Michelangelo's sculptures, such as (1501–1504), exploited the fine-grained and of , enabling intricate carving that captured anatomical precision and conveyed a sense of eternal solidity. The marble's uniform white surface and resistance to weathering allowed for detailed polishing, enhancing the illusion of lifelike skin and musculature, while its quarry-specific variations in grain influenced the artist's selection and adaptation of forms. In 20th-century , Marcel Duchamp's readymades, like (1917), repurposed industrial materials such as , emphasizing their mass-produced sheen and utilitarian to challenge traditional artistry. By selecting everyday manufactured objects, Duchamp highlighted the raw materiality of industrial goods—smooth, impermeable surfaces devoid of handcraft—to critique aesthetic hierarchies and integrate mechanical reproducibility into art. In design applications, material choices profoundly impact both functionality and , particularly in product and architectural contexts. For example, in , the selection of sustainable s like recycled timber balances structural integrity with visual appeal; its natural grain provides warmth and texture for aesthetic harmony while offering sufficient durability for load-bearing roles in green-certified buildings. Such choices enhance —through s with high —and promote environmental resilience, as seen in projects using low-emission composites that maintain sleek, modern without compromising . This integration ensures that products not only perform reliably but also evoke sensory pleasure, aligning form with sustainable imperatives. The sensory impact of materials is further explained through affordances theory, which posits that an object's physical properties suggest potential actions and interactions to users. Developed by James J. Gibson, affordances describe how substance and surface qualities—such as a material's opacity, rigidity, or —offer environmental possibilities relative to human perception. exemplifies this: its affords and , yet its fragility invites caution, potentially leading to misperceptions like mistaking a closed door for an unobstructed passage, thus shaping intuitive responses in art and objects.

Theoretical Frameworks

In art and design theory, materiality extends beyond physical substances to encompass philosophical inquiries into the , relationality, and cultural embeddedness of materials. Theoretical frameworks such as New Materialism and (OOO) reframe materials not as passive mediums but as active participants in creative processes, challenging anthropocentric views of artistic production. These approaches draw from speculative philosophy to explore how materials influence , , and socio-political dynamics in artworks. New Materialism, particularly as articulated by Jane Bennett, posits "vibrant matter" as possessing inherent vitality and agency, independent of human intention. In Bennett's framework, materials exhibit distributive agency, where they co-produce effects alongside human actors, as seen in her analysis of everyday objects that disrupt or enable political ecologies. This theory has influenced art and design by encouraging practitioners to consider the ethical implications of material choices, such as how pigments or fabrics might "act" in installations to reveal environmental interconnections. For instance, in contemporary , vibrant matter underscores the unpredictable interactions between organic and synthetic elements, fostering designs that highlight ecological interdependence. Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO), developed by thinkers like Graham Harman, further decenters human perception by treating all objects—artistic or otherwise—as equally real and withdrawn entities with independent existences. In , materials in art and design are not reducible to their relations with viewers or creators; instead, they maintain an "inner surplus" of reality inaccessible to human interpretation. This perspective has permeated , promoting speculative practices where objects are envisioned as autonomous actors, such as in that anticipates non-human interactions. 's emphasis on flat ontology—where no entity hierarchies existence—invites artists to explore materiality as a realm of equal ontological footing, beyond anthropomorphic projections. Cultural perspectives from the anthropology of art illuminate how materials accrue social meanings through communal practices, particularly in crafts. Anthropological studies reveal that materials like clay, fibers, or beads in traditions serve as carriers of , , and knowledge, embedding socio-political narratives within their forms. For example, in Native American beading or , materials transcend utility to embody kinship ties and resistance to colonial erasure, reinforcing cultural continuity across generations. These frameworks critique Western art's of materials, advocating for designs that honor ontologies where objects mediate human-nonhuman relations. Postmodern critiques deconstruct traditional material hierarchies, questioning the valorization of analog tactility over digital intangibility in artistic expression. Drawing from deconstructionist thought, these analyses dismantle binaries between "authentic" physical media and "simulated" forms, arguing that both reveal constructed realities rather than inherent truths. In , for instance, postmodern theory exposes how pixel-based materiality mimics analog depth, blurring distinctions and critiquing the cultural bias toward permanence in . This approach encourages hybrid designs that subvert material privilege, fostering irony and in postmodern . Contemporary issues in materiality arise in , where artists like employ reflective surfaces to interrogate objecthood and perceptual boundaries. Kapoor's works, such as his polished sculptures, transform materiality into a dynamic interplay of and void, rendering the object as a "non-object" that absorbs and redistributes environmental elements. These installations challenge viewers' spatial awareness, emphasizing how reflective materials enact a phenomenology of absence and presence. Similarly, debates on in question the conservation of transient materiality, with scholars like Erika Fischer-Lichte arguing that ' immateriality—through bodily gestures or decaying props—generates autopoietic events that resist documentation. This tension highlights ongoing discussions about preserving performance's liveness without commodifying its fugitive essence, influencing curatorial practices in time-based media. Recent developments as of 2025 include explorations in post-digital , where AI-generated compositions blend algorithmic processes with physical materiality, further blurring human and nonhuman agency in art production.