Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Is There True Objectivity?
Thanks to Instapundit for linking to this piece in Reason on the role of politics in science.
Is there hope in such circumstances? Yes, hope lies in democracy. Hope lies in a well-educated public able to discern the truth from the data and the politics. Maybe it is time to stop viewing our blogs as advocacy and start viewing them as education?
What these efforts to legislate scientific objectivity really point up is that science, as the chief arbiter of truth in our society, will remain unavoidably enmeshed in politics. The government official who ordered the ban on DDT despite the scientific evidence for its safety, William Ruckelshaus, the first administrator of the EPA, brought admirable clarity to the issue. In 1979, Ruckelshaus wrote to Allan Grant, president of American Farm Bureau Federation president, stating, "Decisions by the government involving the use of toxic substances are political with a small 'p.' The ultimate judgment remains political." What was true for the EPA in 1972, is even more true for federal agencies today. The science wars are here to stay.Which leads me to a short post a the Constructive Curmudgeon quoting a WaPo prinintg of an AP story.
A panel of linguists has decided the word that best reflects 2005 is "truthiness," defined as the quality of stating concepts one wishes or believes to be true, rather than the facts.A little bit like "Fake, but accurate."
Is there hope in such circumstances? Yes, hope lies in democracy. Hope lies in a well-educated public able to discern the truth from the data and the politics. Maybe it is time to stop viewing our blogs as advocacy and start viewing them as education?
