Who Needs Value-Free Science?

Defending Objectivity in Not-So-Value-Free Science

Abstract

This essay is both a defense and a critique of value-free science. It is a defense in that I shall endeavor to demonstrate how science is often influenced by values that distort, misrepresent, or even completely falsify scientific data. I argue that there are many circumstances where values do not play a legitimate role in scientific inquiry, and thus are rightly barred. However, I shall also critique the notion of value-free science by demonstrating that values can (and do) play a legitimate and indeed vital role in the functioning of science. The worry, it seems, is that if science is not value-free, then it cannot be objective. Contrary to this assertion, I will argue that the conflation of value-freedom with objectivity is mistaken. First, I will begin by examining the arguments both for and against value-free science. Second, I will disentangle the notion of value-freedom from objectivity in order to reveal that the two are by no means the same. This will help to set up my defense of objectivity, where I shall reconcile value-motivated science with the possibility of objective knowledge. My thesis is that values are a necessary component of scientific inquiry, and that the lack of value-freedom in science does not compromise the pursuit of objectivity.