Scientific Objectivity Is a Myth – Culture and Beliefs Always Influence Science
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
theconversation.comSciencestory
calmmixed
Debate
20/100
Scientific ObjectivityCultural InfluenceResearch Methodology
Key topics
Scientific Objectivity
Cultural Influence
Research Methodology
Article discusses how cultural values and beliefs influence science, sparking a nuanced discussion on the nature of objectivity in research.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
10m
Peak period
2
0-1h
Avg / period
2
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 6, 2025 at 3:22 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 6, 2025 at 3:33 PM EDT
10m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
2 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 6, 2025 at 4:10 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45152128Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 6:01:58 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK546641/
Blinded experiment - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blinded_experiment
"Science leads to mythological objectivity" comes to mind.
Culture and beliefs shape language and perception and thus influence the interpretation of the things that are logical only in the sense that they are unambiguously algorithmic, meaning any--even partial--change of the premise or it's order changes the conclusion.
But at the end of the algorithmic logic is the higher dimensional logic of purpose, and humans tend to disagree on why we big-banged ex nihilum and whether the code driving evolution has any return value or whether it's a recursive yield and any information previously yielded is neatly packed into all subsequent, proximate and peripheral yields--"the butterfly effect in 1/entropy*i or something" (someone scifi savvy probably has a cool term for that).
Some people say evolution just works and so it runs until it doesn't. I think objectivity in science is like an exploration of different paths at different angles.
It's a discussion, a conversation.
At the end, whoever understood additional angles, moves on a little more objective.