Science is frequently portrayed as an objective discipline whose findings are indisputable. Yet increasingly, members of the scientific, political and philosophical communities are beginning to point to the inherent human biases in this approach to knowledge.

Many people, including Harvard professors and world leaders, are now mulling over the proper role of science in modern culture.

Vice President Al Gore '69 and Czech Republic President Vaclav Havel are but two political leaders who have realized the bias in science and are now looking to alternatives to the scientific world order.

Scientific findings are generally perceived as absolute truth. They influence every aspect of human life, from visits to the doctor to deciding what to cook for dinner.

But Professor of Physics Howard Georgi says that because science is a human endeavor, personal bias cannot be wholly separated from the scientific results.

"Human nature is one of the reasons that the [scientific] process isn't always smooth," says Georgi. "If you look at experimental results, there are pressures on experiments from all sides so they don't uniformly and evenly approach the right answer."

For example, researchers working with cold fusion might have an incentive to make their research results appear valid, since they will lose their jobs if their theory is proved wrong. Conversely, researchers might not want to advance highly controversial theories for fear of losing valuable respect in the scientific community.

Harvey Brooks, Pierce professor of technology and public policy and professor of applied physics, says any uncertainty present in scientific data will inevitably produce conflicting results based on human bias.

"Even among experts who strive mightly and sincerely to be impartial in their assessments, policy preferences will nevertheless significantly influence the interpretation of data and evidence when uncertainties are present," writes Brooks in a paper published in Science, Technology, & Human Values.

Discrediting Science

Given that the bias in science is acknowledged by scientists themselves, many modern political and philosophical thinkers are joining a backlash against science to remove the influence it now holds over modern culture.

Philosopher Paull Karl Feyerabend, a former professor at the University of California at Berkeley, is quoted in Scientific American as saying, "Leading intellectuals with their zeal for objectivity...are criminals, not the liberators of mankind."

The statement by Feyerabend illustrates how emotionally charged some "anti-scientists" can be in trying to topple science from its pedestal.

Though Feyerabend's comments may be rather extreme for an "anti-scientist," the sentiment has definitely worked its way into mainstream thought.

Havel, for one, is a strong critic of the universality of modern science. At a speech in Philadelphia's Independence Hall last summer, Havel said, "Experts can explain anything in the objective world to us, yet we understand our own lives less and less."