Who is biased? On motivation and science
Case study of Richard Lynn
In the idealized science world, research is done for the sole purpose of finding truth, and doesn’t have any ulterior motives for anything else. Papers are published without regards to the utility of the findings for this or that goal of the authors. Responses to others’ research, including any pre-publication peer review is likewise done without any personal feuds, prestige, or self-interest affecting the process. Research questions are chosen optimally so as to maximize the usefulness of the time and resources available with regards to finding truth. This collective effort thus has the effect of maximizing the speed at which humanity can learn new things about the world.
How far is reality from the above? Clearly, all the various conditions I have described are violated to some degree. Nevertheless, the overall process we have in real life still works to some extent. Each month, many exciting new studies are published that throw new light at some research question, sometimes a new one, mostly existing ones. Science, just like capitalism, can work with humans as they are, not idealized homo scientificus or Mertonian scientist. It is possible to boil these various idealized science ideas into a few key principles, most famously done by Robert Merton:
communism: all scientists should have common ownership of scientific goods (intellectual property), to promote collective collaboration; secrecy is the opposite of this norm.[4]
universalism: scientific validity is independent of the sociopolitical status/personal attributes of its participants.[5]
disinterestedness: scientific institutions act for the benefit of a common scientific enterprise, rather than for specific outcomes[6] or the resulting personal gain of individuals within them.
organized skepticism: scientific claims should be exposed to critical scrutiny before being accepted: both in methodology and institutional codes of conduct.[7]
Insofar as science deviates from these high-minded principles, the self-correcting and overall speed of progress is diminished. Here’s some findings on (apparent) violations of these principles: