6 ms·

Objectivity is listed as a problem with science curriculum. Welcome to the future. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2467&context=tqr http:/

Objectivity is listed as a problem with science curriculum. Welcome to the future. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2467&context=tqr http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2467&co...

Practicality 10y ago
While I am not a big fan of contemporary feminism, I am pretty sure taking issue with masculinity or "gendered" text is not the same thing as taking issue with objectivity. Edit: Found this quote in your source "Poststructuralism “rejects objectivity and the notions of an absolute truth and single reality,”" Hmm, this seems an awful lot like a religion.
- hx87 10y ago
  It's pretty trivial to take the Ibn Warraq approach, though: just reject poststructuralism itself.
- zeveb 10y ago
  > I am pretty sure taking issue with masculinity or "gendered" text is not the same thing as taking issue with objectivity. Well, since English is a gendered language, taking issue with 'gendered' text is taking issue with the objective reality that … English is a gendered language.
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    Aside from things like pronouns, English hasn't been gendered since the 14th century: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_in_English https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_in_English
    - zeveb 10y ago
      'Aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?' Pronouns are precisely what folks who complain about gender in English are complaining about (well, that and words like 'mankind').
      - alphonsegaston 10y ago
        Glibness aside, the usage of gendered pronouns does not make a language gendered. That's only true if there has to be agreement between the gender of a noun and words relating to the noun. And it's also not what people are arguing. Instead, they argue that gendered terms are the product of cultural norms and prescriptive grammar that reinforce gender roles that are oppressive to both men and women. That some view these assignments as objective when that's untrue linguistically and historically, I think only lends credence to their point.
- jfoutz 10y ago
  I'm not in any sense an expert. A lot of it seems to boil down to what assumptions are implicit. When you consider something like math, you can pin down what axioms have what consequences. This set of rules produces a group, adding some more axioms produces a field, things like that. When you get to more ordinary stuff like living life, it's not clear what axioms you picked, vs what axioms i picked. Most people don't think about it at all. Imagine a coworker that just started showing up topless. That would be freakishly weird. But really, in a professional setting, why would it matter? There are some handwavy arguments about the nature of professionalism, but all of that relies on what axioms you pick for your culture. Anyway. We all have these ideas about how we're supposed to interact, but we're all playing by different rules. So you get into these Wittgenstein kinds of discussions.
nkrisc 10y ago
This appears to be about STEM education, not STEM fields directly.
- merpnderp 10y ago
  So STEM curriculum should teach there are no objective truths? 1 + 1 is not always 2? Failure to reproduce a study could just be the result of different cultural, gender, or racial differences in the researchers and does not necessarily invalidate anything?
  - nkrisc 10y ago
    I won't go so far as to agree there are no objective truths but your second point certainly sounds plausible. Researcher bias is a well known issue.
Jun8 10y ago
Relevant part of the report: "As these examples show, the STEM syllabi explored in this study demonstrated a view of knowledge that was to be acquired by the student, which promotes a view of knowledge as unchanging. This is further reinforced by the use of adverbs to imply certainty such as “actually” and “in fact” which are used in syllabi to identify information as factual and beyond dispute (Biber, 2006a; 2006b). For example, “draw accurate conclusions from scientific data presented in different formats” (Lower level math). Instead of promoting the idea that knowledge is constructed by the student and dynamic, subject to change as it would in a more feminist view of knowledge, the syllabi reinforce the larger male-dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use make the correct decision."
- Practicality 10y ago
  The equating of objective facts with "male-dominant views" is just bizarre. I mean, seriously, they are saying that in the feminist view is that there is no objective reality? I suppose they are saying that feminists... don't live in... reality. You can't make this stuff up. At least they're up front about it, I suppose.
  - danharaj 10y ago
    A fact is a human construct. It is a symbol. You just conflated facts with reality. A cursory examination of reality will reveal that observations of reality are observer dependent. So what is an objective fact? An objective fact must be one that is covariant in change of observer interpreting the fact. Physical laws like General Relativity are covariant in this way: the facts of relativity differ symbolically depending on the reference frame of the observer but different observers' facts are related in a coherent way. In GR an observer is a reference frame. In order to define objective fact you need to presuppose what an observer is. It is a masculine behavior to consider this question unimportant. A feminine science is much more interested in the study of the subjective because you can't be objective without understanding subjectivity. Ultimately an observer in science is a human. That means objective fact can only be understood by understanding the subjectivity of the scientist. An objective fact is in fact an intersubjective fact, and intersubjectivity is an essential contribution to science by feminism. It's a good keyword to google.
mentat 10y ago
Based on my experience with feminist though in academia, objectivity as a mask for bias is the issue. The preferred method to address is to surface as much of the implicit bias a possible so the whole can be considered. I don't find this problematic.
- int_19h 10y ago
  The problem is when "as much as possible" becomes subjective personal experiences. Basically treating un-aggregated anecdotes as data, while also drawing a line at questioning the validity or applicability of it (aka "just shut up and listen").
- Practicality 10y ago
  Bias is a big problem, but why not call out the problem directly instead of confusing the issue with a tangential, philosophical discussion about whether or not objectivity exists?

Practicality 10y ago

While I am not a big fan of contemporary feminism, I am pretty sure taking issue with masculinity or "gendered" text is not the same thing as taking issue with objectivity. Edit: Found this quote in your source "Poststructuralism “rejects objectivity and the notions of an absolute truth and single reality,”" Hmm, this seems an awful lot like a religion.

hx87 10y ago
It's pretty trivial to take the Ibn Warraq approach, though: just reject poststructuralism itself.
zeveb 10y ago
> I am pretty sure taking issue with masculinity or "gendered" text is not the same thing as taking issue with objectivity. Well, since English is a gendered language, taking issue with 'gendered' text is taking issue with the objective reality that … English is a gendered language.
- alphonsegaston 10y ago
  Aside from things like pronouns, English hasn't been gendered since the 14th century: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_in_English https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_in_English
  - zeveb 10y ago
    'Aside from that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?' Pronouns are precisely what folks who complain about gender in English are complaining about (well, that and words like 'mankind').
    - alphonsegaston 10y ago
      Glibness aside, the usage of gendered pronouns does not make a language gendered. That's only true if there has to be agreement between the gender of a noun and words relating to the noun. And it's also not what people are arguing. Instead, they argue that gendered terms are the product of cultural norms and prescriptive grammar that reinforce gender roles that are oppressive to both men and women. That some view these assignments as objective when that's untrue linguistically and historically, I think only lends credence to their point.
jfoutz 10y ago
I'm not in any sense an expert. A lot of it seems to boil down to what assumptions are implicit. When you consider something like math, you can pin down what axioms have what consequences. This set of rules produces a group, adding some more axioms produces a field, things like that. When you get to more ordinary stuff like living life, it's not clear what axioms you picked, vs what axioms i picked. Most people don't think about it at all. Imagine a coworker that just started showing up topless. That would be freakishly weird. But really, in a professional setting, why would it matter? There are some handwavy arguments about the nature of professionalism, but all of that relies on what axioms you pick for your culture. Anyway. We all have these ideas about how we're supposed to interact, but we're all playing by different rules. So you get into these Wittgenstein kinds of discussions.

nkrisc 10y ago

This appears to be about STEM education, not STEM fields directly.

merpnderp 10y ago
So STEM curriculum should teach there are no objective truths? 1 + 1 is not always 2? Failure to reproduce a study could just be the result of different cultural, gender, or racial differences in the researchers and does not necessarily invalidate anything?
- nkrisc 10y ago
  I won't go so far as to agree there are no objective truths but your second point certainly sounds plausible. Researcher bias is a well known issue.

Jun8 10y ago

Relevant part of the report: "As these examples show, the STEM syllabi explored in this study demonstrated a view of knowledge that was to be acquired by the student, which promotes a view of knowledge as unchanging. This is further reinforced by the use of adverbs to imply certainty such as “actually” and “in fact” which are used in syllabi to identify information as factual and beyond dispute (Biber, 2006a; 2006b). For example, “draw accurate conclusions from scientific data presented in different formats” (Lower level math). Instead of promoting the idea that knowledge is constructed by the student and dynamic, subject to change as it would in a more feminist view of knowledge, the syllabi reinforce the larger male-dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use make the correct decision."

Practicality 10y ago
The equating of objective facts with "male-dominant views" is just bizarre. I mean, seriously, they are saying that in the feminist view is that there is no objective reality? I suppose they are saying that feminists... don't live in... reality. You can't make this stuff up. At least they're up front about it, I suppose.
- danharaj 10y ago
  A fact is a human construct. It is a symbol. You just conflated facts with reality. A cursory examination of reality will reveal that observations of reality are observer dependent. So what is an objective fact? An objective fact must be one that is covariant in change of observer interpreting the fact. Physical laws like General Relativity are covariant in this way: the facts of relativity differ symbolically depending on the reference frame of the observer but different observers' facts are related in a coherent way. In GR an observer is a reference frame. In order to define objective fact you need to presuppose what an observer is. It is a masculine behavior to consider this question unimportant. A feminine science is much more interested in the study of the subjective because you can't be objective without understanding subjectivity. Ultimately an observer in science is a human. That means objective fact can only be understood by understanding the subjectivity of the scientist. An objective fact is in fact an intersubjective fact, and intersubjectivity is an essential contribution to science by feminism. It's a good keyword to google.

mentat 10y ago

Based on my experience with feminist though in academia, objectivity as a mask for bias is the issue. The preferred method to address is to surface as much of the implicit bias a possible so the whole can be considered. I don't find this problematic.

int_19h 10y ago
The problem is when "as much as possible" becomes subjective personal experiences. Basically treating un-aggregated anecdotes as data, while also drawing a line at questioning the validity or applicability of it (aka "just shut up and listen").
Practicality 10y ago
Bias is a big problem, but why not call out the problem directly instead of confusing the issue with a tangential, philosophical discussion about whether or not objectivity exists?