• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

  • Total voters
    73
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

If they work for Monsanto, they must say GMO is harmless.
If Big Chem must say chemicals are harmless.
If Big Pharma must say drugs are harmless.
If Big Energy must say climate change is a hoax and harmless. Or if you want a job with Trump Admnistration.
Hot damn y'all ah swar! How could you imply that scientists are susceptible to political bias?
Low Blow! Linda Lovelace would be proud.
/
 
I answered no. I work for a scientific organization and political bias is not even in the picture. Nothing gets a PhD more off than their research -- a research that is based-on actual research.*


* There are countless researchers in my organization who are still working despite being retired for 20+ years, LOL. It sometimes takes many decades to scratch the surface of their research and it's hard to let go.
 
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

In general yes....and no. It would depend entirely on the scientist. There are scientists out there that will always try and keep the integrity of the science over that of any other ideology. But there are those which will do anything for money. As such I chose "other".
 
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure i understand the question.


Are scientists (the people) susceptible to political bias? Absolutely yes.

Is the scientific consensus that scientists produce susceptible to political bias? In general, no. It is perhaps the most immune to political bias thing we have.
 
Absentglare said:
I'm not sure i understand the question.


Are scientists (the people) susceptible to political bias? Absolutely yes.

Is the scientific consensus that scientists produce susceptible to political bias? In general, no. It is perhaps the most immune to political bias thing we have.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with your last statement. Really, a consensus is nothing more than collective individual conclusions or opinions. In fact, given the concept of group think and peer pressure I'd say it's even more prone to bias.
 
Yes, but they tend to be better than most people at checking those biases. Their fields would bite them back hard if they didn't.
 
Scientists are. The scientific method is not.
 
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

Well, "political bias". Hmmm. I guess that would depend on who's writing their paycheck and for what.
 
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

Yes. Why would one's occupation render them not susceptible to political bias? My political bias, while apparent on this forum, does not have any effect on my handyman work - my repairs, maintenance and improvements show no political bias at all.
 
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

Do scientists have biases, including inclinations towards one political ideology or another? Yes.

Are scientists, by which what you really mean is their scientific work and the scientific consensus, susceptible to political biases?

In the hard sciences? No, because the physical evidence speaks for itself.

In the social sciences? Historically, sometimes yes, but not necessarily in a manner which invalidates their work.​
 
Absolutely they are. All people are unless they take steps to avoid those biases.
 
Other.

Yes, they're human, so of course they have political biases.

However.

If done right, science is politically neutral - facts and data don't change based on what you want them to be.

The danger is in how the data and facts are framed and presented, and what conclusions are drawn - these are interpretations of facts and data, and in many cases might be wrong.

I'm fairly sure that last is where peer review comes in - if a study or experiment can be repeated, and is by multiple people/organizations, then it is considered stronger - but no science is 100%.
 
Yes, but they have regulatory mechanisms to limit its influence. I think the larger issue is the misapplication of research to support political bias.
 
DaveFagan said:
If they work for Monsanto, they must say GMO is harmless.
If Big Chem must say chemicals are harmless.
If Big Pharma must say drugs are harmless.
If Big Energy must say climate change is a hoax and harmless. Or if you want a job with Trump Admnistration.
Hot damn y'all ah swar! How could you imply that scientists are susceptible to political bias?
Low Blow! Linda Lovelace would be proud.
/
Click to expand...

Odd. I work for Big Pharma as a scientist and a large part of my job is to find safety issues with our drugs.

And I know no Chemist or toxicologist who works for a Chemical company who would ever say 'chemicals are harmless'

Although I walked by a bakery the other day that advertised its products as 'chemical free'. I was going to ask how they baked without H2O, polysaccharides, NaCl, or NaHCO3.
 
radcen said:
Are scientists susceptible to political biases?

In general.
Click to expand...

They're human, so sure, I'll be they can be. Peer review has a way of kicking those scientists in the nuts, however.
 
radcen said:
I would disagree with your last statement. Really, a consensus is nothing more than collective individual conclusions or opinions. In fact, given the concept of group think and peer pressure I'd say it's even more prone to bias.
Click to expand...

I didn't say a consensus of opinions.

I was describing a scientific consensus, something that you seem to be underestimating.
 
Absolutely yes... and I am shocked some people have said otherwise...

It doesn't even have to be Political politics, just simply old scientists that are too stubborn to approach problems with a more open mind...

For example, I can tell you in the Physics arena.... String Theory should die. It is sticking around simply because of the romance and symmetry. And there are MANY theories and ideas of the "majority consensus" that have little to no more credibility than any other competing theories. Unfortunately you have to wait for a lot of old scientist's to die before new ideas can be taken more seriously and investigated. And this is true is almost ALL academic studies, you name it history, humanities, psychology, biology, etc. etc.

And a whole other wing of scientific bias is research money given by the government. Research money is given by a huge bureaucracy that can pick and choose what is "important" research and what isn't. And sometimes research money is given for political purposes to prove a particular stance.
 
celticwar17 said:
Absolutely yes... and I am shocked some people have said otherwise...

It doesn't even have to be Political politics, just simply old scientists that are too stubborn to approach problems with a more open mind...

For example, I can tell you in the Physics arena.... String Theory should die. It is sticking around simply because of the romance and symmetry. And there are MANY theories and ideas of the "majority consensus" that have little to no more credibility than any other competing theories. Unfortunately you have to wait for a lot of old scientist's to die before new ideas can be taken more seriously and investigated. And this is true is almost ALL academic studies, you name it history, humanities, psychology, biology, etc. etc.

And a whole other wing of scientific bias is research money given by the government. Research money is given by a huge bureaucracy that can pick and choose what is "important" research and what isn't. And sometimes research money is given for political purposes to prove a particular stance.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, though that's a related but slightly different question.

Even in the science of forensics, prosecutors and defense attorneys go shopping for an expert/scientist to say what they want to say, and they'll each often use the same data.

It is also not uncommon for an administration to quash a study that's that's not working out to their desired conclusion. But those are flat-out politicians, not scientists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom