Science has always been the main cognition tool of humanity as it promoted the acquisition of new knowledge and contributed to the further evolution of thought. The great significance of the given phenomenon is also proved by the fact that people have always been trying to determine the frames that limit the further evolution of scientific thought and to obtain pure knowledge to guarantee the further progress.
The given approach to science gave rise to a number of concerns related to the objectivity of the obtained ideas and their possible usage. This issue became one of the main questions of science that promoted the appearance of numerous cogitations about the nature of science, its objectivity, and subjectivity.
Besides, Longino assumes that the term objectivity is rather ambivalent and could be applied to theories, beliefs, etc. (Longino, 1990, p. 64). However, if to speak about science, there are numerous factors that have an effect on the concept and introduce the necessity of the precise investigation of any idea to guarantee at least its relative objectivity. Longing also states that it goes along with subjectivity and individualism that result from human nature.
Any scientist is impacted by his/her personal beliefs and tries to contribute to the development of science-based on his/her own ideas that might be subjective. For this reason. Knowledge benefits from the existence of numerous points of view on the same question, while cooperation and consensus are also vital.
Longinos ideas about the objectivity of science are taken up by Beatty and Moore in their article. Should we Aim for Consensus? They agree that any scientific thought or idea is rather subjective and results from the cogitations of a person who has his/her own preferences. That is why the question of whether consensus is needed or not appears. The authors state that in the case of science, the lack of consensus might result in the creation of a premature or mistaken idea (Beatty & Moore, 2012, p. 199), impacting the further progress and evolution of scientific thought. Yet, it is still vital for a scientist to be able to provide his/her ideas for the opponents to analyze them.
If to compare Longino and Beatty and Moores perspectives on science, it is possible to state the similarity of the approach to the ideas of objectivity and criticism. It follows from their cogitations that science benefits from vigorous discussions related to a certain concept or idea. In other words, the objectivity of a certain assumption is guaranteed by the existence of numerous points of view on the same question.
Furthermore, the consensus could be established due to the long-term consideration of the doubtful question. That is why its necessity becomes obvious as it guarantees the further evolution of scientific thought. Beatty and Moore also investigate this idea in terms of the authority of a certain scientist. They tend to prove the idea that consensus and authority in science are closely interrelated (Beatty & Moore, 2012, p. 200).
In conclusion, the question of the objectivity has always been an ongoing issue for science. Being sure of the necessity of the existence of various points of view on the same idea, both Longino and Beatty and Moore recognize the great role criticism and discussion play in the evolution of science. That is why their works are devoted to similar issues and are closely interrelated.