Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Iranian Institute of Philosophy and Wisdom

10.22034/jpiut.2021.41631.2664

Abstract

The effect of values on science has created the fear for some philosophers of science that the main mission of science, namely objectivity, will be undermined. The traditional conception of objectivity, which depends on metaphysical objectivity, has been the correspondence of the mental image with external and independent reality; but with the difficulty of achieving it, as well as the diversity of modern epistemological foundations, newer interpretations of it have been proposed that also affect the value-ladennessof science. Linking objectivity with the element of trust or epistemological perfection or purity of unscientific values and personal tendencies are examples of these approaches. Objectivity means the conformity of science with external reality and once the basis is clarified as to whether such a thing is possible or not, the method of achieving this ideal and its ills are discussed. This objectivity includes two stages of process and outcome, and scientific results will be objective if the process of science is objective and free of non-objective factors and tools.

Keywords

-       Brown, M. J. (2020) “Is Science Really Value Free and Objective? From Objectivity toScientific Integrity”, in What Is Scientific Knowledge?, ed. K. McCain and K. Kampourakis, 226–242. New York: Routledge.
-       Carrier, Martin (2013) “Values and Objectivity in Science: Value-Ladenness, Pluralism and the Epistemic Attitude”, Science & Education, 22 (10): 2547-2568.
-       Douglas, H. (2009) Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
-       Feyerabend, P. K. (1978) Science in a Free Society, London: Verso.
-       Frankena, William  (1973) Ethics, Englewood  Cliffs:  New  Jersey.
-       Hacking, Ian (2015) “Let’s Not Talk About Objectivity” in Objectivity in Science, edited by Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson and Jonathan Y. Tsou, pp. 19- 33, Cham: Springer.
-       Harding, Sandra (2015) Objectivity and Diversity; another Logic of Scientific Research, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
-       Harding, Sandra (1995) “Strong Objectivity: A Response to the New Objectivity Question” Synthese, 104 (3): pp. 331– 349.
-       Harman, G. (1996) “Moral Relativism,” in Moral Relativism and Moral Objectivity, G. Harman and J.J. Thompson (eds.), Cambridge MA: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 3–64.
-       Gowans, C. (2015) “Moral Relativism”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, available at:  http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral - relativism/.
-       Lacey, H. (1999) Is Science Value-Free? Values and Scientific Understanding, New York: Routledge.
-       Porter, Theodore M. (1995) Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
-       Quine, W. V. O. (1992) The Pursuit of Truth, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
-       Reiss, J., and Sprenger, J. (2014) “Scientific Objectivity”, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta, available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/
-       Scheman, Naomi (2001) “Epistemology Resuscitated: Objectivity as Trustworthiness” in Engendering Rationalities, ed. Nancy Tuana and Sandra Morgen, Albany, State University of New York Press.
-       Wong , D. (1991) “Relativism”, in A Companion to Ethics, P. Singer (ed.), Oxford, Blackwell Publishers.
-       Wright, Jack (2018) “Rescuing Objectivity: A Contextualist Proposal” in Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 48 (4): pp. 385-406.
CAPTCHA Image