A scientist’s bias does not invalidate the evidence produced

Evidence

But the mere observation that a scientist or group of scientists holds certain cultural or political views does not undermine the evidence and arguments they produce to support those views. This is true even when those views have influenced the scientific problems the scientists work on or the methods they adopt. After all, despite its objectionable origins, the field of statistics is not inherently bankrupt because it was developed with particular goals in mind. The insights of Galton and Pearson have been developed into a large and invaluable set of tools for analyzing and interpreting data—even if the misuse of statistics remains commonplace. — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age, 122

Categorization

• XREF: The claim that a tool’s racist origins don’t negate its usefulness is a strong counter-example to guilt-by-origin thinking; connects to point about separating content from provenance in evidence assessment. — connects to: Industry disinformation demanded impossible certainty regardless of accumulated evidence — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age: How False…, 94; Lay theorists avoid seeking disconfirming evidence rather than falsifying hypotheses; Theoretical doubts about objective truth need not override practical reliance on evidence — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 50 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• A scholar’s bad faith need not invalidate the accuracy of their findings. #corroborates (0.95) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 460
• Scientific methods exist precisely to counteract researchers’ inevitable personal biases #expands (0.80) — Holm Gero Hümmler, Ulrike Schiesser, Fact and Prejudice, 753
• Theoretical doubts about objective truth need not override practical reliance on evidence #expands (0.75) — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 50
• Bias awareness alone does not change behavior and can backfire #complicates (0.72)
• Lay theorists avoid seeking disconfirming evidence rather than falsifying hypotheses #complicates (0.70)
• Convergent correlational evidence should justify action absent perfect scientific certainty #expands (0.70) — Harriet A. Washington, A Terrible Thing to Waste, 50