Actually, at first I didn't know what this was about but quickly understand where the author is coming from. It's a natural distribution on a scale. All things can be scaled and will fit into some kind of distrubution curve.
I think what he is intimating (based on the excerpt above) is that while a photograph is always a tangible result whether by P&S or with a Toyo Field Camera, it takes more input from a skillful photographer to produce the image with a Toyo field camera and that is subjective. So, on a scale, you have subjective on the left (using the Toyo) and objective, if you will, on the right (using a P&S). However, there are all kinds of photographic equipment that would fall in between the two ends of the scale. If you lined them up from left to right, then you have less input the farther you move to the right in the direction of automated everything P&S cameras.
Sorry about the lengthy thought above, but you would probably have a "bell curve" when all the cameras were plotted on the scale. Kind of interesting.
It would be cool to overlay such a distribution with all kinds of layers representing various traits, backgrounds, dna and other properties of photographers using those same cameras.