 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
45degreeN
King Kong
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2462
Location: Salem Oregon
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:53 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | Science IS objective, or at least it is as objective as humans are ever going to get. The entire system is designed to eliminated biases.
|
For someone to become a Phd candidate for astronomy for instance, they must pass through the hands of how many teachers, counselors, and advisers? How many people have selected them from the crowds of onlookers and wannabees. It takes passion and commitment to even qualify for a Phd position in addition to all of the academic requirements met at a very high level. At each level of schooling they must meet with the approval of how many teachers each with their own agenda and bias.
How many master degree holders are even allowed to go onto the Phd level finding a mentor who is willing to put up with their weaknesses and use their strengths to fit into the mentor's idea of what is needed. And then they must find a project of their own one that sets them on a new course but not too new since in that case it might just get rejected and set down as unacceptable.
It would be a miracle to find one who was not biased to some large extent, who could go through this process unaffected by others and who was so independent that they needn't rely upon the acceptance of others. By the time a person gets to the age of say 25 they are full of opinions and speculations and ambitions all bent, prodded and pushed by these various advisers and teachers.
If they are especially brilliant they've been coddled and promoted and their egos built up to the point where it will burst of they don't get their first choice every time (which has probably been the case at each level of achievement.)
Giving lip service to some objectivity is required otherwise it exposes their egocentric nature and they can be outed as unacceptable even toward the end of this process but each and every candidate goes through this process.
No I have a proper respect for the humanity of even Phd's, with all the classically normal characteristics that implies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6805
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 7:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 45degreeN wrote: |
For someone to become a Phd candidate for astronomy for instance, they must pass through the hands of how many teachers, counselors, and advisers? How many people have selected them from the crowds of onlookers and wannabees. It takes passion and commitment to even qualify for a Phd position in addition to all of the academic requirements met at a very high level. At each level of schooling they must meet with the approval of how many teachers each with their own agenda and bias.
|
If this were true, then science would only ever turn out drone copies of Ph.D. supervisors, and nobody would ever "think outside the box" or discover new techniques for tackling new problems. But scientists discover new techniques and new ways of thinking about problems ALL THE TIME.
If this were true, then science would have stagnated LONG ago. But clearly it hasn't.
So there's obviously something wrong with your hypothesis that Ph.D. students are selected to become drones.
In fact, it's completely ridiculous. Supervisors ENCOURAGE their students to explore new ideas and think differently. This is a cornerstone of science. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
