Science is objective. And in my view we cannot take any experimental results seriously except in the light of good explanations of them.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Scientific experiments are expensive, and people are entitled to know about them if they want to. I think it is very difficult to convey ideas.
It is necessary to look at the results of observation objectively, because you, the experimenter, might like one result better than another.
It is crucial for scientists to be willing to be wrong; otherwise, you might not do the most important experiments, or you may ignore your most important findings.
The very nature of science is discoveries, and the best of those discoveries are the ones you don't expect.
Science is not a game in which arbitrary rules are used to decide what explanations are to be permitted.
Science is based on reproducibility and manufactured objectivity. As strong as that makes its ability to generate claims about matter and energy, it also makes scientific knowledge inapplicable to the existential, visceral nature of human life, which is unique and subjective and unpredictable.
The process of science is difficult and challenging. It involves always being aware that your ideas might be right or they might be wrong. I think it's that kind of balance that makes science so interesting.
We would be in a nasty position indeed if empirical science were the only kind of science possible.
The strongest arguments prove nothing so long as the conclusions are not verified by experience. Experimental science is the queen of sciences and the goal of all speculation.
Though many have tried, no one has ever yet explained away the decisive fact that science, which can do so much, cannot decide what it ought to do.