Observation and perception are the key elements that greatly influence the field of science. The elements not only shape the view of the general public towards science and scientists, but also enable the scientist to draw appropriate inferences related to different situations. Scientists rely on observation to get reliable evidence on different experiments and studies.
On the other hand, the general public relies on observation and perception to develop a view that influences the position of science and scientist in the society (Pion & Lipsey, 1981). This study establishes the impacts of perception and observation in science and scientists.
The view of the public on science and the scientists is influenced by observation and perception. In this case, members of the public from children to adults have developed a stereotypical assumption about science and scientists. Scientists have been perceived as individuals who are heavily engaged with their jobs (Pion & Lipsey, 1981). The individuals tend to give more attention to their jobs compared to the social aspects of life.
Through observation and perception of the general public, scientists have been portrayed as antisocial individuals who do not care about issues such as public relations or interpersonal relationships with other members of the public. The image given to science and scientist transcends from the media effect. Different media programs in the society tend to portray scientists as individuals with special needs (Pion & Lipsey, 1981).
However, the above stereotypical view of the public does not have significant impacts as far as the duties of scientists and the influence of science is concerned. Scientists are individuals who rely on observation and perception to deduce the findings of experiments and studies. Observation in the field of science enables scientist to find solutions to different problems. It also provides the opportunity for scientists to agree on different issues and develop appropriate conclusions that can withstand the public evaluation (Pion & Lipsey, 1981).
For observation to stand its merit in the arena of science, it must have the element of objectivity. Science relies on objectivity to evaluate the suppositions of different theories and findings. Unlike the assertions in other fields such politics and economics that are influenced by power, science relies on observable objective evidence to influence its findings and perceptions (Bacon, 1994).
To this end, it is widely evident that there is a close connection between observation and perception in science. Observation is deduced from a perceptual experience where individuals are able to touch, watch, listen, taste, and smell. Through observation scientists are able to develop results that are influenced by perception. People develop perceptions from what they can hear, see, touch, or smell (Bacon, 1994).
The relationship between perception and observation has portrayed science as an enterprise, which relies on the liberation of the senses. Therefore, the assessment of observation should be based on its accuracy and truth in relation to perception. In most cases, science tends to describe events that fall within the ambits of one’s perceptual experience.
However, this approach may not be accurate where different individuals have different experiences in a similar situation (Bacon, 1994). In such cases, science allows intersubjectivity of various individuals to prevail. The element of intersubjectivity in observation and perception depends on the issues being tested. Appropriate data that overrules individual subjectivity can be applied in observations to influence perceptions (Bacon, 1994).
References
Bacon, F. (1994). The Novum Organum: With other parts of the great instauration. Chicago: Open Court Inc.
Pion, G., & Lipsey, M. (1981). Public attitudes toward science and technology: What have the surveys told us? The Public Opinion Quarterly, 45 (3), 303-316.