Objectivity in science and the physical world

anonymous123's picture

 After class on Monday, I started thinking more about whether objectivity is possible in the physical world. The video we watched on Dr. Quantum and how particles react differently when being observed made me wonder if the behavior of the particles mirror the real world. Perhaps the way in which the world as we know it is actually classified by those who control information, despite what the actual fact of the matter is. When we discussed gender earlier in the course, we talked about how classifications are restricting. Perhaps these classifications, like many other classifications we use, actually mirror the views of those who create the classifications, and are subjective rather than objective.

Groups:

Comments

kgould's picture

I agree with the idea that

I agree with the idea that our interpretations of the world are far more subjective than we think, even when it comes to empiricism and the physical sciences. 

Beyond who controls the information, what gets published, the kinds of things that people see and hear, our brain is structured in a way that is controlled by both our genetics and our environment (nature and nurture). No one has the exact same genetics and the exact same upbringing/experience of the world. So the connections and pathways in our brains are unique to each person--and while perceptions certainly coincide, to call them "identical" or "objective" seems almost dangerous to me?...

anonymous123's picture

 It is the very idea of an

 It is the very idea of an "identical" or "objective" world that I also find troublesome. It seems that science contradicts the very notion that there is an objective world. And isn't science the most credible source that we humans rely on to gain information? 

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.