[PREV - APPROXIMATELY_PERFECT]    [TOP]

OBJECT

                                         July 4, 1992 

 Objectivity beseiged                       


Let's get more concrete. 

Look at the front page of 
the Times.  Occasionally 
there are articles labeled
"News Analysis", but 
most of the articles could
be labeled this way.  

Nearly ever article has 
a slant, frequently 
reflecting the bias of 
the writer more than that     It's not unusual for the 
of the editors.               front page to be going one        
                              way, and the editorial 
These are writers             page going another.  
raised on the idea that
there is no such thing
as objective reporting, 
hence they make no               A National Public Radio news    
attempt to get                   headline: "Health Care Advocates
anywhere near it.                Recommend National Health Policy."
                                          
If you read to the end               What's a "Health Care Advocate"?
of the article, you                  Does someone oppose health care?
find that it has a                   
conclusion on it,                    Can you imagine someone calling
as though it were an                 themselves this who isn't an 
essay... though sometimes            advocate of socialized medicine?
the conclusion is                    
inserted in the form                 The entire headline is manufactured.
of a quote.                          Daily plugs are made on the current
                                     hot items, irrespective of whether
"I didn't editorialize.              there have been any developments. 
I just reported the facts:                                             
that's what the guy said."  

              I submit that this is all 
              a cop-out: Objectivity may 
              be difficult, pure objectivity
              may be impossible, but you can
              get a lot closer to it than 
              this.                                 
              
              Telling "both sides of the story."         Covering the 
              is the _minimum_ that should be            nth side is 
              done.  This much isn't _that_ hard.        the real trick. 
                                                   
                                                   
I knew a philosophy student                             
who argued for a kind of                             
subjectivity, against my                             
"scientific realism".                                
Copernicus's discoveries were         Awful examples:         
inspired by a quest for the           Compernicus was         
perfection of the circle,             right for the wrong                      
Einstein said "God does not           reasons (orbits are     
play dice" and pursued his            ellipses), and          
vision of a non-random                Einstein seems to have 
universe, why should this             wasted decades of                       
fellow feel bound to a notion         his life running                    
of the objective existance of         away from the randomness
reality?                              of quantum mechanics.   
                                                                          
All I could say is that the                 
universe shows no great                    
tendency to align itself in 
accordance with our desires.
                                       
Things are.   We believe.           
And belief does not effect what is.            Not usually.       
                                               Sometimes I think 
                                               this is only an 
                                               approximation, though.
                                               
                                               It really is hard 
                                               to see the completely
                                               unexpected.                 
                                                                SOCIAL_REGISTER
                                               
                                               So the things you "see", 
                                               that which can be 
                                               observed, is at least
                                               partly determined by 
                                               what you believe, what you
                                               expect to see. 




--------
[NEXT - BOUNDARIES]