Purity and objectivity

Proctor again, summarizing a 1938 article on “Science and the Social Order” from Robert Merton: “the ideal of ‘pure science’ serves a dual function in modern society. On the one hand, the exaltation of pure science represents ‘a defense against the invasion of norms that limit directions of potential advance and threaten the stability of scientific research as a valued social activity.’ The ideal of purity is instilled early on in the scientist; science ‘must not suffer itself to become the handmaiden of theology or economy or state,’ for as soon as compliance with religious doctrine, political demands, economic utility, or any other ‘extra-scientific’ criteria substitutes for purely intellectual criteria, science ‘becomes subject to the direct control of other institutional agencies and its place in society becomes increasingly uncertain.’ The ideal of pure science also serves certain psychological functions. Failure to ignore the broader context of one’s research increases the possibility of bias and error.” He describes this as a “need to withdraw from . . . ‘externalities.’”