Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

PT1 : In the production of knowledge, does it matter that observation is…

- - - - to what extent the flaw has meaningful impact on knowledge.
- - - - Human sciences study human behavior, societies, economies, cultures, and psychology.
        Observation is crucial: experiments, fieldwork, case studies, surveys.
        But scope is complicated because humans are unpredictable, subjective, and influenced by culture.
        Why flaws matter: If observations are biased or selective, they can reinforce stereotypes or distort understanding.
        Example: Early anthropology observed colonized societies through a Eurocentric scope → distorted conclusions about “civilized” vs “primitive.”
    - - Observations in human sciences are never neutral; they are filtered through cultural, political, and social perspectives.
        Different perspectives → different interpretations of the same observation.
        Why flaws matter: Perspective can turn observation into justification for power.
        Example: Intelligence testing in the early 20th century was observed through racialized perspectives → used to promote eugenics policies.
    - - Ethics are central: human sciences involve real people, so flawed observations can cause real harm.
        Ethical codes (informed consent, confidentiality, non-maleficence) developed to address flaws.
        Why flaws matter: Unlike in natural sciences, flawed observation here has direct moral consequences.
        Example: Milgram’s obedience study → flawed because it ignored the psychological harm caused to participants.
    - - Methods: experiments (psychology), ethnography (anthropology), statistical modeling (economics, sociology).
        Tools: surveys, interviews, psychological testing, big data.
        Flaws: researcher bias, sample limitations, self-reporting errors, observer effects (people behave differently when observed).
        Why flaws matter: If flawed tools are used, policies based on research can harm people.
        Example: The Stanford Prison Experiment → method flawed by lack of controls and researcher influence, yet it shaped public perceptions of authority and ethics.