Why Science is an All-Too-Human Enterprise
Science is often portrayed as a flawless cathedral of logic—a realm where pristine data and rigorous methods transcend human frailties. Yet beneath this idealized image lies a vibrant, messy, and profoundly human endeavor. From the biases shaping experiments to the social dynamics governing breakthroughs, science is less a machine and more a mosaic of aspirations, errors, and collective struggle. This article explores how embracing science's "all-too-human" nature—a phrase echoing philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche's critique of grand systems—reveals not weakness, but the true engine of discovery 1 6 .
While human capital refers to the knowledge and skills of individuals, human enterprise encompasses the purposeful, daring actions that drive innovation. It's the difference between possessing data and daring to reinterpret it—a shift from "what we know" to "what we strive for" 5 . For example, Einstein's revolution required not just mathematical skill, but the audacity to reimagine time and space.
Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche dissected our relationship with the past in ways that resonate deeply with modern science. He warned against three approaches to history:
"Nature only exists for us as a coherent whole insofar as it affects us through our bodies" .
Nietzsche argued that "truths" are human interpretations shaped by bodily experiences and cultural contexts. Science, similarly, doesn't uncover pre-existing absolutes but constructs models through experimentation and debate. This view anticipates modern neuroscience, where perception actively shapes reality.
Background: In 1985, psychologists Marcello Truzzi and Baruch Fischhoff analyzed historical measurements of the speed of light (c). Their goal: test whether scientists, despite rigorous methods, unconsciously bias results.
| Era | Avg. Estimate (km/s) | Deviation from True Value | % Within Stated Error Margins |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-1900 | 299,990 | +198 km/s | 20% |
| 1900–1920 | 299,710 | -82 km/s | 33% |
| 1920–1940 | 299,630 | -162 km/s | 25% |
| Post-1940 | 299,792 | ±0.5 km/s | 100% |
Analysis: Scientists anchored their results to prior studies—even erroneous ones. This contradicted the myth of total objectivity, revealing how social conformity permeates measurement 4 .
Background: A 2019 study by Pierre Azoulay et al. tested a provocative idea: do scientific fields advance only when established leaders die?
| Metric | Change Post-Death | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Publications by new entrants | +8.6% | Outsiders from adjacent fields |
| High-impact papers (top 1%) | +20.3% | Novel methods/theories |
| Publications by collaborators | -3.1% | "Gatekeepers" less influential |
Analysis: This "funeral effect" confirms philosopher Thomas Kuhn's theory of paradigm shifts: entrenched ideas often outlive their usefulness until demographic change forces progress. Gatekeepers' control over funding/journals can delay innovation—a deeply human problem of power and legacy 4 .
Science's humanity isn't a flaw—it's managed through structured "reagents" that channel biases into productive dialogue. Below are key tools shaping the enterprise:
| Reagent | Function | Human Element Managed |
|---|---|---|
| Peer Review | Filters errors; validates methods | Anchoring bias, conformity |
| Interdisciplinary Teams | Integrate diverse perspectives | Cultural/perspective blindness |
| Pre-registration | Publicly commit to methods pre-experiment | "HARKing" (post-hoc reinterpretation) |
| Funder Diversity | Multiple sources (govt., NGOs, industry) | Gatekeeping; agenda-setting |
| Open Access Data | Publicly share raw results | Transparency; collective critique |
Science's "all-too-human" nature is its greatest strength—and its most demanding challenge. As Nietzsche urged, rejecting monumental hero-worship or antiquarian data-worship allows critical history to fuel progress 3 6 . This means:
The future of science lies not in chasing pure objectivity, but in cultivating a humble, diverse enterprise where human aspirations—daring, difficult, and purposeful—drive us toward deeper understanding. As Nietzsche might affirm: it's in our finitude that discovery becomes possible.