Abstract
There are two opposed views on the proper relationship between academic research and political activism. The first argues that academics who study politics must remain objective, hence precluding activism. The second argues that academics can and should also be political activists, hence precluding scholarly objectivity. This article argues against an assumption shared by these otherwise opposing positions: that activism and objectivity are incompatible. It conceptually identifies and then normatively defends a form of objectivity characterized by active engagement with evidence that is what Max Weber calls “inconvenient” for one’s existing beliefs and commitments. Far from being incompatible with political activism, this form of objectivity is essential to its success. Since scholars, activists, and scholar-activists alike would all benefit from active engagement with inconvenient evidence, I conclude that academic institutions should promote this form of objectivity among both activist and non-activist scholars, while political organizations should promote the same virtue among both academic and non-academic activists.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations
Reference50 articles.
1. Reiss, Julian , and Sprenger, Jan . 2020 [2014]. “Scientific Objectivity.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. Winter 2020 ed. (https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/scientific-objectivity/).
2. OED Online . 2022. Oxford University Press. Retrieved December 8, 2022 (www.oed.com).
3. The Limitations of the Open Mind
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献