Objectivity in Science

There is a common myth that scientists is that they are totally objective but it is not true. First of all scientists human and are subject to human flaws that prevent total objectivity. In addition ones philosophical assumptions will always influence ones conclusions no mater how objective you try to be.  Furthermore just knowing something about the topic will inevitably causes a person to form opinions about that topic such that you can only be totally objective if you are totally ignorant. 

Take a look at the following video and notice how the blue ball moves.

Most likely you concluded that the gravitational attraction of the larger ball or some other physical force was pulling on the blue ball making its path bend. If you did you have just let your own preconceptions about the real world cloud you thinking about an animation video. The real answer is that I drew the frames of the video to make it do that.

Experimentation a Process of Science

Experimentation is the investigation of the causal relationships among variables or the testing of a hypothesis.

Albert Michelson and Edward Morley performed the Michelson-Morley Experiment in 1887 by splitting a beam of light in two sending in two directions to measure by interference the difference in the transition of the two beams. It is considered the first strong evidence against the theory of a luminiferous aether helping lead to the development of Special Relativity.

Controlled Experimentation is fundamental to the ideal of science. It is where the scientific method and repeatability works best. However not all area of scientific study lend them selves to experiments. Most real world observations are beyond the possibility of a controlled experiment do to things like distance, size and time. In many case experiments can only be used to test the possibility of a hypothesis which is some times done in historical sciences. Trying to replicate a past event to show it could have happened.

The Ideal Experiment should reduce the number of variable to one and be easily repeated by other scientists to increases the likely hood that someone will try to repeat it. It also makes it more likely that the attempt to repeat it will succeed. It should also limit complexity and cost so as to increase the likely hood that someone will try to repeat it making it more likely that the attempt to repeat it will succeed.

The Importance of Repeatability in Science

Repeatability is the replication of a scientist’s experiments and results by other scientists. The can be done because the physical laws are the same every place so an experiment conducted by one scientist should work for any other scientist so as to double check the results. Repeatability is not to be confused with replicating passed events which is done to show the possibility or feasibility of that event which is a totally different from the repeatability being discussed.

Repeatability works best with experiments with well controlled variables so that replication can be as completely as possible. It does not work well in situations where there are difficulties in controlling variables. In such cases results are not easily replicated. The degree of repeatability varies from field to field.

So while repeatability is important to science it is not the absolute principle some make it out to be and some fields are more repeatable than others.

Using Theoretical Systems in Science

A Theoretical System is the conceptual structure that a scientific community uses as the bases for developing testable theories and interpreting data it is also referred to as a paradigm. A scientific community’s theoretical system is accepted as true by that community and it is generally fixed and not subject to change with new data. This is true only of core concepts to which theoretical patches are often added to make a theoretical system fit reality when reality is not what was originally expected. The theoretical system forms the bases for developing testable theories and interpreting data.

Example

Origins sciences has two main theoretical systems. Biblical creation which has a 6 days creation, a global flood and a young Earth and General evolution has the Big Bang cosmology, Nebula theory of star and planet formation, Uniformitarian Geology, Abiogenesis and Biological evolution. All other theoretical systems are basically mixtures of these two including old earth creation and theistic evolution.

The key to understanding theoretical systems is that they can only be evaluated internally because they are self contained systems. Different theoretical systems often produce different and even contradictory interpretations for the same evidence so that an interpretation from one theoretical system can not be used to disprove another because an interpretation from one theoretical system may not be valid in another.

Parts of a theoretical system can start out as testable theories and become so entrenched that they loose all testability by being patched to the point where they can absorb any new data. The Big Bang is a good example of this. It has be come so entrenched that there is no mainstream thought of abandoning it because contradicting data is absorbed when possible such as the accelerating expansion of the universe; which was  by the invention of dark energy; or ignored such as the relationships between active galaxies and quasars.

Theoretical systems can have concepts in common but while different system may share some concepts while concepts are totally different. They are an unavoidable but little understood part of Science because data is not self interpreting and needs a theory on which to base the interpretation. Unfortunately it is often unclear as to where a testable theory end and theoretical system begins.

A Discussion of Peer Review in Science

Peer Review is the submission of scholarly works and research to the review of other’s in the same field. Peer Review practically speaking refers to review for publication in a journal proving a way to find and correct mistakes before publication of a paper includes spelling, grammar, mathematical and other form of mistakes. It a method of quality control to the research being published helping guard against poor research.

Unfortunately this provides a means of blocking the publication of novel concepts that run contrary to the current paradigm. If dissenters respond be publishing their own peer review journals they are criticized and their journals are often decried as non reputable. Some times it is denied that they are even legitimate peer review. This has been shown too happened in origins research with Creation Science peer review journals and climate research with climate peer review journals that publish papers that go against Global Warming.  So called reputable journals seemed to be defined based on agreement with establishment paradigms. Attacking sincere peer review efforts in this way harms scientific Research.

It There really Scientific Objectivity

Human beings can not be totally objective since we all have preconceptions about the world. You can only be really objective if you know nothing about a topic since knowledge on a topic creates opinions that influence preconceptions. This is also why every effort is made for juries to know little or nothing about the case in advance. You can only be totally objective if you are totally ignorant.

Dealing with data involves three steps collection, organizing and interpreting Collecting data includes measuring and recording and it is the most objective part of science. Since much of this is done by machines it is where true scientific objectivity is found. Even this process is not totally objective since the selection of data to be tested is not always objective and is often based on the theory being used says to look for. This part of the process is still the most objective. Organizing Data includes the categorizing of data sets. As soon as an organizing system exists it influences how the data is seen and this causes a loss of objectivity. The interpretation of data depends on the theoretical system being used to do the interpretation because different theoretical system produces different interpretations. Scientists using different theoretical systems on the same data can produce different and even contradicting interpretations and a flawed theoretical system causes flawed interpretation,