Comments on: Objectivity, science and stories http://marctyrrell.com/2008/10/07/objectivity-science-and-stories/ Being in the main the musings of a Symbolic Anthropologist Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:09:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: zenpundit http://marctyrrell.com/2008/10/07/objectivity-science-and-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-1992 zenpundit Sat, 08 Nov 2008 04:59:23 +0000 http://marctyrrell.com/?p=79#comment-1992 Hi Dr. Marc "Objectivity" in the Rankean sense used by historians denotes a healthy respect for credible evidence and accepted methodological practices of the profession. It cannot be metaphysically pure or quantitatively demonstrably perfect objectivity; history is a craft, not a branch of physics. If you turn up documents indicating that your pet theory about event or person "X" is full of shit (pardon my French)and therefore revise your views and publish accordingly, then you are a historian who can take pride in your professional objectivity. If you bury the evidence or twist it beyond recognition ( think Noam Chomsky here)in the narrative then you are not a historian but rather a subjective polemicist. Hi Dr. Marc

“Objectivity” in the Rankean sense used by historians denotes a healthy respect for credible evidence and accepted methodological practices of the profession. It cannot be metaphysically pure or quantitatively demonstrably perfect objectivity; history is a craft, not a branch of physics.

If you turn up documents indicating that your pet theory about event or person “X” is full of shit (pardon my French)and therefore revise your views and publish accordingly, then you are a historian who can take pride in your professional objectivity.

If you bury the evidence or twist it beyond recognition ( think Noam Chomsky here)in the narrative then you are not a historian but rather a subjective polemicist.

]]> By: admin http://marctyrrell.com/2008/10/07/objectivity-science-and-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-1838 admin Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:18:54 +0000 http://marctyrrell.com/?p=79#comment-1838 Hi Carl, I've read some of her stuff and it's pretty good . Hi Carl,

I’ve read some of her stuff and it’s pretty good .

]]> By: Carl http://marctyrrell.com/2008/10/07/objectivity-science-and-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-1818 Carl Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:40:45 +0000 http://marctyrrell.com/?p=79#comment-1818 Nice. Have you run across Sandra Harding's work on objectivity? She calls communicative objectivity 'strong', because it's grounded in the perceptions and practices of a deliberately diversified community; and scientistic objectivity 'weak', because the attempt to decouple investigation from any standpoint leaves it at the mercy of unexamined investigator prejudice. Nice. Have you run across Sandra Harding’s work on objectivity? She calls communicative objectivity ‘strong’, because it’s grounded in the perceptions and practices of a deliberately diversified community; and scientistic objectivity ‘weak’, because the attempt to decouple investigation from any standpoint leaves it at the mercy of unexamined investigator prejudice.

]]>