Is science objective?

My interpretation of "not strictly logical" would involve the fact that changing paradigms re-define the nature and range of what is called "data". Since logic is based on "set membership", if the universe of discourse changes, so do the original set definitions, hence original "logic" becomes inappropriate.

An example might be the paradigm shift in psychology involving language acquisition. The "behaviourist" paradigm saw language as subject to the "logic " of conditioning, but Chomsky's "generative grammar" paradigm highlighted "mistakes" as data rather than "successful repetitions". In essence. "grammar" changed from a prescriptive to a descriptive mode, but this did not negate some conditioning findings as applicable to language.

Well fresco- you introduced Kuhn and, as I have it, he said there was no logical reason to change a paradigm. Which doesn't mean there is no logical reason to change it but only that your authority said so.

Alphaville is I presume an example where the paradigm can't change except to destruction mode. And a warning about over reliance on computers.

Nature, in the form of insects attracted to the floodlights, has changed the paradigm in the England v Australia semi-final in South Africa. Whether that is logical or not is probably a matter for biologists.

"The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft agley."

Hey spendius. Long time indeed. I am prevented from attending these discussions with the same frequency and consistency as before. Busy life

But anyway, I simply think that no matter how objective science is, there is always the choice of what the scientific processes should be applied to. That choice is subjective. If no one is interested in examining something through scientific procedures, it will not be examined. There is always an initial drive that makes us put something under the microscope. We don't just study random things in the hopes that some day we will have examined everything.

Guess what science avoids studying most determindly.

The inner workings of female human minds?

That's right Cyr.

Do you know why the seekers of the scientific facts avoid that matter?

We are better off not knowing.

Point taken.

But it doesn't reinforce the notion that science is completely objective.

Yes--I know. That's the point.