Re: [asa] Expelled and ID

From: David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Wed Apr 23 2008 - 22:05:31 EDT

No, it isn't a question of individual bias. The point is that at a broader
level, institutional science is not truly objective. Research priorities
are decided based on many factors that involve very fallible, subjective
human judgment.

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Dennis Venema <Dennis.Venema@twu.ca> wrote:

> Hmm. I still don't see your point. Yes, funding, etc can direct research
> for example, I do work on diabetes / insulin signaling because I am funded
> to do so but does that mean you think that I introduce a bias into my
> results because of my funding source? Yes, funding can direct the *types *of
> experiments that are done, but the data is still the data if it can be
> reproduced the *quality *of the experiments should not be affected. In
> cases where things were skewed/faked for an agenda the deception comes to
> light when someone tries to repeat the experiments.
>
> dennis
>
>
> On 4/23/08 5:16 PM, "David Opderbeck" <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At the risk of sounding anti-science, which I don't think I am, I don't
> see how you can gainsay that institutional science is skewed by agendas and
> viewpoints that aren't always objectively scientific. Institutional science
> is driven by funding. Funding is allocated by a relatively small,
> relatively non-diverse segment of both the general public and the scientific
> community, and the mechanisms and procedures of funding are truly accessible
> only to an equally small and non-diverse population.
>
> Moreover, in some areas, particularly public health and pharmaceuticals,
> funding mechanisms are heavily influenced by intellectual property rights,
> markets, and multinational corporate interests. The data is the data, but
> the question of which data gets developed -- which research programs get
> funded -- is heavily influenced by social, cultural and economic factors
> that may have little to do with scientific merit or the broader pursuit of
> truth.
>
> (I am not here suggesting that claims of peer review bias against ID
> advocates have merit. That in particular isn't my bailiwick, but I do
> believe that peer review is not as objective as it is often made out to be).
>
>
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Apr 23 22:06:40 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 23 2008 - 22:06:40 EDT