It is the thing in itself that computers cannot perceive or know about. They never will. All computers can do is break down real things into symbols and manipulate the symbols. Symbols are not the thing in itself, they cannot reproduce the thing elsewhere for example. They cannot fall in love because they cannot perceive anything at other than one remove as symbols.
Babbage understood this, it is a pity so many modern scientists do not. The belief that anything can be reduced to symbols and retain its integrity is a matter of faith. Without awareness we forget interpretation of binary data is no substitute for the reality it signifies.
I don't think this misunderstanding is motivated by desire for objectivity. I think it is motivated by fear, a fear that science has limits to its explanatory powers. Many scientists, who study quantum theory or complexity theory, know this already.
It is easy to understand how some scientists are concerned that interpretation of qualitative data might mean the introduction of subjectivity into analysis. But subjectivity exists, why can it not be studied and when understood used?
Is it possible to introduce subjectivity into scientific method?
Comments