We have been operating this way in science scince the time of Des cartes and
Bacon so we are in a 300-400 year old model or rut depending on how you view
this. We all have biases and these flow from our values and life
experiences. When someone says to me that they are neutral and they only do
objective science I really think they are deluding themselves. To do that, I
think you have to disconnect yourself from being a human.
So it maybe the unwritten in our papers and our science that is also
important but we never see that. Maybe we should have a section in our
papers where people had to provide the reader with some insight into where
they are coming from<what do they belive, what is their value system> so we
could read and know what the paper is based on beside the data and
information. This would be just as important as the methods and other
section of our papers. It certainly would make for much more interesting
papers and it would be much more truthful because we could no longer hide
behind the CURTAIN OF DENIAL.
Davis, CA 95616