Critical Theory held that researchers are part of the social object they study

Evidence

Critical Theory differed on several counts. First of all, it refused to fetishize knowledge as something apart from and superior to action. In addition, it recognized that disinterested scientific research was impossible in a society in which men were themselves not yet autonomous; the researcher, Horkheimer argued, was always part of the social object he was attempting to study. — Martin Jay, The Dialectical Imagination, 299

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines Critical Theory’s core epistemological break: the researcher embedded in the social object, rejecting value-free positivism.
• XREF: connects to: Scientists lose objectivity when the subject of study is their own perception — Eric J. Heller, Why You Hear What You Hear- An…, 2061; Scholarly theoretical lenses can actively conceal social reality rather than reveal it — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 3491; Researchers can compartmentalize knowledge across roles and overlook implications. — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 881 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Scientists lose objectivity when the subject of study is their own perception #corroborates (0.85) — Eric J. Heller, Why You Hear What You Hear- An…, 2061
• A scholar’s ideological agenda does not invalidate the findings of their research #contradicts (0.78) — Robert Irwin, For Lust of Knowing, 536
• Researchers can compartmentalize knowledge across roles and overlook implications. #expands (0.75) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 881
• Scholarly theoretical lenses can actively conceal social reality rather than reveal it #complicates (0.72) — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 3491