Changes

Politics, Religion, and Science

Bias and Science

[[Talk:theory of relativity|Some people]] are apparently under the impression that scientific findings are heavily influenced by political leanings.  Although the funding of scientific endeavors, and policy implementations based upon scientific findings, ARE political in nature, I contend that science as a discipline is not, and that all honest scientists will have the same findings, regardless of their personal beliefs.   

Some people are apparently under the impression that scientific findings are heavily influenced by political leanings.  Although the funding of scientific endeavors, and policy implementations based upon scientific findings, ARE political in nature, I contend that science as a discipline is not, and that all honest scientists will have the same findings, regardless of their personal beliefs.   

Let me be clear that by "science," I mean an impartial, falsifiable effort to model the observable (measurable) universe.

Let me be clear that by "science," I mean an honest, falsifiable effort to model the observable (measurable) universe.

==Reasoning==

==Reasoning==

=== Science is limited by nature ===

=== Science is limited by nature ===

Science is, at its core, the study of the natural world.  Honest scientists cannot report any more than they actually observe.  Attacking such scientists as "biased" is tantamount to saying that nature and reality themselves carry a bias.

Science is, at its core, the study of the natural world.  Honest scientists cannot report any more than they actually observe.  Attacking such scientists as "biased" is tantamount to saying that nature and reality themselves carry a bias.

=== Nature is consistent ===

=== Nature is consistent ===

The laws of the natural world are, presumably, the same everywhere in the universe.  Injecting bias into scientific findings is therefore a dicey proposition, since findings can be verified simply by doing an experiment again.  Frauds are eventually exposed for the frauds they are, and as evidence for a hypothesis accumulates, the chances that it is a fraud cleverly spun in a politically convenient way are reduced.

One fundamental assumption of science is that the same everywhere in the universe.  Injecting bias into scientific findings is therefore a dicey proposition, since findings can be verified simply by doing an experiment again.  Frauds are eventually exposed for the frauds they are, and as evidence for a hypothesis accumulates, the chances that it is a fraud cleverly spun in a politically convenient way are reduced.

 

=== Consensus across political lines ===

=== Consensus across political lines ===

If science had a political tilt, then we would expect the scientists of one political system to arrive at different conclusions than those of another.  Did Soviet science arrive at drastically different conclusions than Western science during the Cold War?  I don't know of any statistics on the matter, but my gut feeling is that the answer is "No."  This is related to the above point; carbon atoms in Moscow behave the same way as carbon atoms in New York, so it's hard to imagine that the basic conclusions about carbon atoms would differ between the two locales.

If science had a political tilt, then we would expect the scientists of one political system to arrive at different conclusions than those of another.  Did Soviet science arrive at drastically different conclusions than Western science during the Cold War?  I don't know of any analysis on the subject, but my gut feeling is that the answer is "No."  This is related to the above point; carbon atoms in Moscow behave the same way as carbon atoms in New York, so it's hard to imagine that the basic conclusions about carbon atoms would differ between the two locales.