OK, so what does "objectivity" mean? What is the meaning you intend to convey when you use this word? I have asked four or five times now, and you continue to ignore this simple request for clarification. What's the problem?
Is Science Objective?
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Is Science Objective?
"Who cares, wins"
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: Is Science Objective?
1) The fact that all observations are subjectified by the previous life of the subject.
2) The fact that all observations are subjective perceptions and as such describe a phenomenon and not a noumenon.
I did mention this a few times now pattern-chaser. Sometimes you should read back
~Immanuel Kant
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Is Science Objective?
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑October 14th, 2020, 10:46 amOK, so what does "objectivity" mean? What is the meaning you intend to convey when you use this word? I have asked four or five times now, and you continue to ignore this simple request for clarification. What's the problem?
Oh, I read back a lot. And what I read is that, in a topic that considers whether science is objective, you are unable to say what you mean by "objective". I conclude, after asking so many times, to no avail, that you don't have any real clue at all of what objectivity is. And yet, in a topic centred on objectivity, you have a lot to say about it. Incomprehensible.
"Who cares, wins"
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: Is Science Objective?
~Immanuel Kant
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Is Science Objective?
What do you mean by that? You are using a word you are apparently unable to define or understand.
"Who cares, wins"
- Arjen
- Posts: 467
- Joined: January 16th, 2019, 4:53 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Immanuel Kant
Re: Is Science Objective?
~Immanuel Kant
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Is Science Objective?
Objectivity is an aspiration only.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Is Science Objective?
You have made no case, only asserted your views unclearly, and refused to clarify.
"Who cares, wins"
-
- Posts: 19
- Joined: January 26th, 2022, 12:09 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Catdinal Robert Sarah
- Location: Australia
Re: Is Science Objective?
- RJG
- Posts: 2767
- Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm
Re: Is Science Objective?
No. The truths of science rely upon the 'uncertain' nature of experiential objects/evidence and therefore are 'subjective'. We can't get objectivity from science; subjectivity.TheAstronomer wrote:Is science objective?
We get 'objective' truths from Logic (and math).
The truths of science are man-made.
The truths of logic (and math) are given-to-man.
-
- Posts: 317
- Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm
Re: Is Science Objective?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7933
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Is Science Objective?
Ok, so when a scientist uses logic to make a hypothesis and then designs an experiment to support or disprove the hypothesis, and the experimental results are in conflict with the hypothesis (that was arrived at through the scientist's use of logic), what is the conclusion?RJG wrote: ↑January 31st, 2022, 9:34 amNo. The truths of science rely upon the 'uncertain' nature of experiential objects/evidence and therefore are 'subjective'. We can't get objectivity from science; subjectivity.TheAstronomer wrote:Is science objective?
We get 'objective' truths from Logic (and math).
The truths of science are man-made.
The truths of logic (and math) are given-to-man.
- RJG
- Posts: 2767
- Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm
Re: Is Science Objective?
If these "stories" (or "truths" or "theories", etc) are "man-made", then they are subjective, not objective.Raymond wrote:Of course science is objective. It deals with the physical stuff the world is made of. The story itself though is a story we tell and thus personal. Different people, different groups of people, tell different stories. All want their stories to be objectively true. Who doesn't? As long as we realize it are all just stories, everything is okay.
***********
Sound deductive logic, like mathematics, doesn't commit errors.LuckyR wrote:Ok, so when a scientist uses logic to make a hypothesis and then designs an experiment to support or disprove the hypothesis, and the experimental results are in conflict with the hypothesis (that was arrived at through the scientist's use of logic), what is the conclusion?
Humans can make errors in math/logic, but math/logic itself can't make errors.
If an experimental result doesn't follow the logic or the math, then there is a human error somewhere.
-
- Posts: 317
- Joined: January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm
Re: Is Science Objective?
For the one who tells the story, there is an objective reality. The subjective stories describe an objective reality. I have a different story than the standard model story. I consider that story as objectively false. The story it tells is subjective though. Since Xenophanes introduced the notion of one and only reality this idea got a firm grip on western reality. There can only be one reality, the same for all. I agree but that reality is the story we present, so subjective.RJG wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2022, 7:19 amIf these "stories" (or "truths" or "theories", etc) are "man-made", then they are subjective, not objective.Raymond wrote:Of course science is objective. It deals with the physical stuff the world is made of. The story itself though is a story we tell and thus personal. Different people, different groups of people, tell different stories. All want their stories to be objectively true. Who doesn't? As long as we realize it are all just stories, everything is okay.
***********Sound deductive logic, like mathematics, doesn't commit errors.LuckyR wrote:Ok, so when a scientist uses logic to make a hypothesis and then designs an experiment to support or disprove the hypothesis, and the experimental results are in conflict with the hypothesis (that was arrived at through the scientist's use of logic), what is the conclusion?
Humans can make errors in math/logic, but math/logic itself can't make errors.
If an experimental result doesn't follow the logic or the math, then there is a human error somewhere.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7933
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Is Science Objective?
Exactly, human "logic" or more accurately "guesswork" is very prone to errors, thus why experiments need to be performed rather than making hypotheses and prematurely considering the work to be completed, when in fact it has not even started.RJG wrote: ↑February 2nd, 2022, 7:19 am
***********Sound deductive logic, like mathematics, doesn't commit errors.LuckyR wrote:Ok, so when a scientist uses logic to make a hypothesis and then designs an experiment to support or disprove the hypothesis, and the experimental results are in conflict with the hypothesis (that was arrived at through the scientist's use of logic), what is the conclusion?
Humans can make errors in math/logic, but math/logic itself can't make errors.
If an experimental result doesn't follow the logic or the math, then there is a human error somewhere.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023