2.5 VALUE-FREE, OR VALUE-LADEN? by Craig Sutton

csutton36 — 2025-09-10 05:48:46 UTC

How does the knowledge within sciences differ from artistic knowledge? Hint - use the words ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ in your answer.

csutton36 — 2025-09-10 05:50:01 UTC

In pairs, come up with a definition of science that you both agree with.

csutton36 — 2025-09-10 05:51:14 UTC

This is the definition of science created by the British Science Council -

"...Science is the pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence."

Whose definition do you prefer?
What do we commonly call this ‘systematic’ methodology, and what are its different steps

csutton36 — 2025-09-10 05:52:13 UTC

To what extent does the scientific method ensure that knowledge is produced in an objective way?
What role do values play in the production of scientific knowledge via this method?
How else is objectivity ensured in science?

csutton36 — 2025-09-10 05:56:58 UTC

Get ChatGPT to help you summarize and identify key quotes from this article about how scientific thinking can promote collaboration.
Do you agree with John Campbell that it is an ethical imperative to ensure that Everybody should have an entry-level understanding of how science gets done?

csutton36 — 2025-09-10 05:57:46 UTC

Should science be value-free, or should we embrace ways in which it is value-laden? Justify your answer!

081171 — 2025-09-10 08:09:35 UTC

I think this definition is kind of dodgy. The part where it says "following a systematic methodology based on evidence", by this statement alone, this means that the study such as the criminology, literature or philosophy is also Science. Since they also use the "systematic methodology based on evidence" as well, we can argue that the literature and philosophy sometimes if not often use it. However, criminology definitely use the "systematic methodology based on evidence". Further more, you might argue that criminology still use the non-systematic method too. But remember that the chemistry, biology or the typical "science" study we know also sometimes use the non-systematic as well. Thus, I think the definitinon is a bit loose.

0810991 — 2025-09-10 08:13:12 UTC

Although the scientific method provides a set of steps that allow us to follow in a logical manner, it doesn't completely ensure that the knowledge would be produced objectively.

Some people could cut corners with their experiments, some people could research incorrect information. The method is only a structure of instructions on what to do, but does not dictate how to do something.

Typically, objectivity is obtained with the intent of the person trying to figure out certainty in something. A Highschooler seeking out an answer in a science experiment surely would produce something less objective than a scientist who does science for a living.

The method gives us a baseline on how to obtain objectivity, but even then it has flaws depending on how people approach the steps.

-19 Astor

081105_ — 2025-09-10 08:16:07 UTC

・The scientific method is to minimize the error by using evidence with logical reasoning and repeating the experiments.

・Social value play in the production of knowledge by using the study or analysis of research on climate change, for instance.

・ Objectivity ensured by reproducibility of experiments. The experiments must provide same result when others repeat.

Tsuyoshi, seigen

0810893 — 2025-09-10 08:18:09 UTC

Several scientists with different perspectives and values have pursued and experimented with the same methods. As a result, scientific knowledge is obtained. Therefore, its objectivity is ensured by the absence of effects from different values and biases. Values play a crucial role in the process of developing a hypothesis. The hypothesis could be something outside common sense and differs significantly among people's values. So Miyu

081081_ — 2025-09-10 08:23:15 UTC

The scientific method ensures objectivity because it relies on observation, experimentation, and replication. However, it cannot be guaranteed that it is perfectly objective because a human's interpretation will be involved.

Values influence science by guiding what questions are asked, what methods are considered ethical, and how results are applied.

Objectivity is further ensured through peer review, reproducibility of experiments, and transparency of data, allowing the wider scientific community to verify.

Riku & Miri

081171 — 2025-09-10 08:24:26 UTC

The knowledge can be considered to be objective as long as there are no direct effect towards us. I think there are such a thing as "complete" objective knowledge.

About how objective the scientific method is, I think it is quite objective if we consider about the purpose of the method. But ofcourse, some methods are bad/good in sense of moral, and some methods are bad/good in sense of efficiency. So, I think it is objective as long as it is reviewed by many people or peers.

0810981 — 2025-09-10 08:24:29 UTC

Experiments and analyses are objective because they are data-based; therefore, it is not affected objectively.

Values play an important role in scientific knowledge because some knowledge is connected to other knowledge, and they can help create new knowledge.

Physical experience is ensured in science due to senses, such as pain and joy.

Hiroto, Yukei, Sayu

0811031 — 2025-09-10 08:24:29 UTC

・The scientific method is used to minimize bias through observation and experimentation. Though researchers create choices subjectively. The step of asking a question about the world, and the choices of materials are influenced by our bias. And, the conclusion of the observation and experiment is a fact. Overall, the scientific method increases objectivily, and partially subjectively.

・What people think differs from their interests. For example, if Izac didn`t become interested in why an apple falls from a tree, we couldn`t know about gravity.

・By using standardised measurements and other tools, and conducting peer reviews.

KEIS HIBIKI JIN

081082_ — 2025-09-10 08:28:34 UTC

Scientific method ensures that knowledge is producing in an objective way proving questions with evidence. However, how data is analysed varies by person, and contents may be different even if it explores the same theme.
Fixed values can limit perspectives and affect how scientists structure their methods. Therefore results from the experiment could be determined as uncertain when a third person sees the result, because of differing interpretations.
Objectivity can be ensured through replication. When somebody uses knowledge derived from somebody else, it is because they share the same understanding and have same interpretation, thus objectivity.
Maho, Kaede, Wakana

0810931 — 2025-09-10 08:29:20 UTC

The scientific method ensures that knowledge is produced in an objective way because it is not affected by people's emotions.

In the production of scientific knowledge, the scientific method, the role of values is important because we all have different priorities, cultures, and ethical standards.

Rin Kei

081084 — 2025-09-10 08:30:16 UTC

・Scientific knowledge is usually based on the facts that some kind of method has proved, which we could tell are objective. However, sometimes when we try to understand the results, we interpret them in our own way, which makes it kind of subjective.

・Values could affect the production of scientific knowledge. People have various ways of feeling and interpreting. Whether the object is large or small, it really depends on its values. This could manipulate the result of scientific knowledge.

・They are ensured by having the same experiment many times by different people. It could be someone who has the same opinion or it could be someone who has the opposite opinion.

Hana Yuzu