Indeed, we should be objective, but we should also read Daston & Galison's book about the history of the term, and how its meaning has shifted over the decades from the mid-19th century until now (so that we don't get too self-righteous about the matter). http://www.amazon.com/Objectivity-Lorraine-Daston/dp/1890951781
(And then, we could read my article about how some of E. B. Titchener's work is more explicable if seen through the lens of Daston & Galison's history of objectivity, forthcoming in the December issue of the history of science journal, /Isis/) :-) Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ ========================== Jim Clark wrote: > Hi > > We can be more or less objective. Moreover, we are more likely to be > objective if we aspire to being objective (i.e., try to be sensitive to our > biases) and if we follow well-developed principles for identifying, reducing, > minimizing, and perhaps eliminating bias (i.e., the repertoire of scientific > tools generically referred to as research methods). > > Take care > Jim > > > > James M. Clark > Professor of Psychology > 204-786-9757 > 204-774-4134 Fax > j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca > > >>>> "Louis E. Schmier" <lschm...@valdosta.edu> 24-Nov-10 10:26 AM >>> >>>> > I think the question should be "Can we be objective?" > > Make it a good day > > -Louis- > > > Louis Schmier > http://www.therandomthoughts.edublogs.org > Department of History http://www.therandomthoughts.com > Valdosta State University > Valdosta, Georgia 31698 /\ /\ /\ /\ > /\ > (O) 229-333-5947 /^\\/ \/ \ /\/\__ / \ > / \ > (C) 229-630-0821 / \/ \_ \/ / \/ /\/ / \ > /\ \ > //\/\/ /\ > \__/__/_/\_\/ \_/__\ \ > /\"If you want to climb > mountains,\ /\ > _ / \ don't practice on mole > hills" - / \_ > > On Nov 24, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Jim Clark wrote: > > Hi > > Yes! That is, we should "seek, acknowledge and interpret objective > evidence, even when it conflicts with our preconceptions or with what we > wish to be true." Are you thinking that we should NOT try to base and > revise our beliefs on objective evidence? > > Take care > Jim > > James M. Clark > Professor of Psychology > 204-786-9757 > 204-774-4134 Fax > j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca<mailto:j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca> > > Michael Britt <michael.br...@thepsychfiles.com> 24-Nov-10 10:03 AM > > I recently interviewed Adele Faber, co-author of several parenting > books. As I edited the audio file for my podcast it occurred to me that > it will be clear to the listener that I agree with her ideas regarding > parenting (which are clearly more "Rogerian" than "Skinnerian"). But > aren't I supposed to be, as a psychology instructor "objective"? > > I've been turning this over in my head for the past few days and I > don't know if others find this issue of concern, but today I came across > an article in Time magazine by James Poniewozik. He's talking about the > supposed objectivity of journalists, but I think what he has to say is > relevant to us: > > "...what journalists and people who talk about them generally call > "objectivity" is not actual objectivity, but something more like > "neutrality" (often a false and labored one). Objectivity does not mean > having no opinion, taking no side or expressing no point of view. > [Objectivity] means seeking, acknowledging and interpreting objective > evidence, even when it conflicts with your preconceptions or with what > you wish to be true. You can have subjective beliefs*because we all > do*and yet subordinate them to objective evidence." > > Your thoughts on whether we should try to be "neutral"? > > Michael > > Poniewozik article: > http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/11/16/olbermann-jousts-koppel-in-battle-of-high-horses/#ixzz16DElMZfp > > > > Michael Britt > michael.br...@thepsychfiles.com > http://www.thepsychfiles.com > Twitter: mbritt > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6718 > > > or send a blank email to > leave-6718-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: lschm...@valdosta.edu. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13368.9b8fe41d7a9a359029570f1d2ef42440&n=T&l=tips&o=6719 > > or send a blank email to > leave-6719-13368.9b8fe41d7a9a359029570f1d2ef42...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6720 > > or send a blank email to > leave-6720-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0da&n=T&l=tips&o=6724 > or send a blank email to > leave-6724-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6727 or send a blank email to leave-6727-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
