Objectivity And The Scientific Community Essay

1543 Words Oct 23rd, 2016 7 Pages
Donna Haraway and Vandana Shiva have argued against the idea that science needs objectivity. Haraway explains that objectivity, “has been used to signify a leap out of the marked body and into a conquering gaze from nowhere,” (Haraway 581). She says that objectivity is the, “transcendence and splitting of subject and object,” (Haraway 583). Their arguments against objectivity look at the role of individual objectivity within science. However, science needs objectivity in order to obtain the most truthful account of the natural world. Individual objectivity will never be obtained, and suggesting that individual scientists should be objective may imply that they can be objective, thus they will overlook their blind spots. Objectivity, instead, needs to be aimed for by the wider scientific community. By aiming for objectivity as a wider scientific community, scientists would not claim objectivity and the scientific community would read research publications, analyzing them in terms of the potential unintended and implicit biases of the researchers. Objectivity will never be obtained, but it is necessary for science. Aiming for objectivity will bring the scientific community the closest to the truth about the world. In this paper, I will discuss the three main arguments against objectivity given by Vandana Shiva and Donna Haraway and I will explain how aiming for objectivity as a whole scientific community will resolve the issues that the arguments are concerning.
One argument…

Related Documents