4 ms·
That's really a narrow-minded view on the scientific method. While it's true that the process of carrying out an experiment should (at least in theory) be free
by EntropyIsAHoax 5y ago
That's really a narrow-minded view on the scientific method. While it's true that the process of carrying out an experiment should (at least in theory) be free of human biases, the reality is that bias pervades science just as much as any human endeavour.
Even if you manage to completely get rid of biases in the actual experiment, what we choose to study, how the study is structured, and how we interpret the results will be subject to our biases. Science doesn't "care if you're black, white, trans, bi, or toxically masculine" because it doesn't "care" about anything. It's the fallible humans carrying out science that choose what to care about and investigate.
- ethanbond 5y agoVery odd (or telling, at least) that this is getting downvoted. Of course there are all sorts of forces at play on what gets studied, what gets published once it’s studied, and what gets shared once it’s published. The scientific method has many tools to mitigate biases within itself/its practitioners. But as you say, the scientific method is a very, very small part of an enormous scientific apparatus that doesn’t (yet) have similar tools for mitigating these forces in itself. A trivial example: It’s hard for non-native English speakers to get published in the world’s premiere journals because, well duh, they publish in English. Are we to conclude the scientific method can only be carried out to Nature’s standards in English? Obviously not.