1 Comment
⭠ Return to thread

But how is an "unbiased" science even possible? Ultimately, we have to decide on a point of view - whom to follow or whether we lead someone in a direction that is determined by our interests, fears, expectations, our will. What is "science" at all? Looking for "laws". What are laws? Repetions of identical or "similar" cases. Similarity depends on a point of view of what we think is "essential". We have to choose. It is ultimately an aesthetic decision.

Karl Popper in The Logic of Scientific Discovery:

"Generally, similarity, and with it repetition, always presuppose the adoption of a point of view: some similarities or repetitions will strike us if we are interested in one problem, and others if we are interested in another problem. But if similarity and repetition presuppose the adaption of a point of view, or an interest, or an expectation, it is logically necessary that points of view, or interests, or expectations, are logically prior, as well as temporally (or causally or psychologically) prior, to repetion. But this result destroys both the doctrines of the logical and of the temproal primacy of repetitions.

[...] for any given finite group or set of things, however variously they may be chosen, we can, with a little ingenuity, find always points of view such that all the things belonging to that set are similar (or partially equal) if considered from one of these points of view; which means that anything can be said to be a 'repetition' of anything, if only we adopt the appropriate point of view. This shows how naive it is to look upon repetion as something ultimate, or given."

Expand full comment