Objectivity - Revision history

Conservative at 18:26, March 30, 2024

2024-03-30T18:26:56Z

Northwest: Undo revision 1844423 by Cwihfehihief (talk) reverted vandalism

2022-03-09T00:39:32Z

Undo revision 1844423 by Cwihfehihief (talk) reverted vandalism

Cwihfehihief at 00:26, March 9, 2022

2022-03-09T00:26:33Z

DavidB4-bot: /* top */HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced: http://books.google.com → https://books.google.com (2)

2018-09-26T18:53:05Z

top: HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced: http://books.google.com → https://books.google.com (2)

DavidB4-bot: /* top */clean up & uniformity

2016-07-13T16:53:10Z

top: clean up & uniformity

Michael4: added references

2011-01-28T06:28:52Z

added references

Joaquín Martínez at 01:57, January 15, 2011

2011-01-15T01:57:56Z

DavidBG: Adding sentence

2010-04-30T22:04:47Z

Adding sentence

WesleyS: cat

2008-11-22T22:26:06Z

cat

ClarkeD: fixed!

2008-09-09T02:52:22Z

fixed!

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:26, March 30, 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>		'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>
		+
		+	== See also ==
		+
		+	*[[Self-distancing]]

	==References==		==References==

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:39, March 9, 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~Gay rights~~'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>	+	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>

	==References==		==References==

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:26, March 9, 2022
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>	+	Gay rights'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>

	==References==		==References==

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:53, September 26, 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [~~http~~://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [~~http~~://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>	+	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [https://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [https://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>

	==References==		==References==

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:53, July 13, 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>, historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [http://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>	+	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists,<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref> historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [http://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>

	==References==		==References==

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:28, January 28, 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~The~~ basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others.	+	'''Objectivity''' is the basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others. [[Science]] is often assumed to be objective, yet this claim has been challenged by a range of groups, such as philosophers<ref>Trowbridge, B. ''Understanding the concept of reality''; Helium, (n.d.) [http://www.helium.com/items/1501527-the-concept-of-reality]</ref> psychologists<ref>Malson, H. ''The thin woman: feminism, post-structuralism, and the social psychology of anorexia nervosa''; Routledge; London. p. 35, (1998) [http://books.google.com.au/books?id=_HFLqqZ3xB0C&lpg=PA35&dq=%22science%20claims%20to%20be%20objective%22&pg=PA35#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>, historians, and sociologists of science.<ref>Richards, E. "Will the Real Charles Darwin Please Stand Up?" in ''New Scientist''; Reed Business Information; London. p. 887, (22-29 December 1983) [http://books.google.com/books?id=NpS_6bpt9KoC&lpg=PA887&dq=%22science%20is%20objective%22&pg=PA887#v=onepage&q&f=false]</ref>
		+
		+	==References==
		+	<references />

	== See also ==		== See also ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:57, January 15, 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely objective, although many come closer than others.	+	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely [[objective]], although many come closer than others.
		+
		+	== See also ==
		+
		+	*[[Credibility]]
		+
	[[Category:Dictionary]]		[[Category:Dictionary]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:04, April 30, 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience.	+	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience. No human being is completely objective, although many come closer than others.
	[[Category:Dictionary]]		[[Category:Dictionary]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:26, November 22, 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience.		The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience.
		+	[[Category:Dictionary]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:52, September 9, 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~{{disputed}}~~	+	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical, observable data without applying personal preconceptions or experience.
−	The basing of [[knowledge]] on empirical data.