Discussion»Statements»Rosie's Corner» In physics I believe it is said that the mere observation of something changes it. If true we can never know WHAT IS can we? How?
That actually refers to Quantum Physics, concerned with the fiendishly difficult problem of analysing what happens inside atoms. Some of this can only carried out by extreme methods such as splitting atoms into their components; but the particles and forces under study are individually so tiny the atoms and forces within the measuring equipment can affect them. Conventional physics' dimensions are such that the measuring has little or no effect on the subject - and the sources of such errors can be traced and compensated for.
You can't really use this as an analogue to human affairs such as politics, though, as I think you suggest.
The external influences on the measurements in physics are more readily quantified and corrected for, and the processes being studied are reasonably consistent. If you know that the measurement method affects the process being measured, you can make at least intelligent assessments of how and to what extent, perhaps by carrying out special calibration experiments.
Humans are neither quantifiable nor consistent, cannot be calibrated, and are subjected to a far greater range of external and internal influences and forces than atoms; so you cannot predict what if any effect observing them will have on their behaviour.
There is another point too, which homes in your question of truth.
The honest scientist, as most are, will say "We think x happens because y and z... " and their peers will examine the studies and if possible repeat the experiments to prove, disprove, correct or refine the first reports.
Or the report will admit, "We have studied x, but we still don't understand y's and z's influences", so the reviewers might try to spot the problem - which could be that interference of phenomenon by method, or could be a faulty hypothesis in the first place.
In life outside the lab, this objectivity and often, honesty, disappear. There is no peer review or repetition of experiments. There is often no "We think", but instead an opinion posed as if unassailable fact. There is often, no honest admission of genuine ignorance or inability to understand the problem. There is often no scrupulous examination of possible sources of error or misleading "readings".
So whilst there is this received wisdom regarding the difficulties encountered in quantum physics, it is not something that can really be applied to anything else; scientific or otherwise.
Thank you for your thoughtful, informative and helpful reply Durdle. Stereotypes arise from observation which leads to interpretation/perception. They are not necessarily true individually but collectively they are true enough that they are employed. The "wisdom of numbers" in forecasts/predictions comes to mind. "The terrible twos". Not all 2-year-olds are terrible. "Latin lover". Some probably aren't so hot in that department. "Dizzy blond". Some are geniuses. I knew one. "Women love shoes". Not this woman. I prefer to go barefoot in the house and wear sandals out. Shoes are NOT my thing. But stereotypes convey information in shorthand form. The thing I find most troubling about humans is they will purposefully lie which means you can never really know. Science doesn't lie. The scientists may be mistaken about something but that is not due to errors of commission. Except for the ones who falsify their findings so they can keep the grants coming. When I said how can we ever KNOW anything what I meant was we can only think we know based on our observations, our ability to comprehend (that's where intellect comes in) and the information available at the time. Honest errors occur. Doctors used to advertise cigarettes. That was before they found out cigarettes can kill people. But many humans lie 24/7 so whatever you "learn" from them is not only worthless but potentially harmful/damaging. And then there are those who promulgate absurdities and sadly believe them. They spread lies thinking they are true and the gullible will believe them because they need to and they will forward them in tweets or emails. Soon millions of people are talking about and believing something that is not true. That's how and why Doofus Don got elected prez. The people who were conned didn't know they were being conned. It's very discouraging, disheartening and depressing to learn that an amazing (shocking) number of them choose to believe a compulsive liar and reject reality for his version of "truth". What is truth? Where do you find it? How can you rely on it or is it always only temporary, mercurial, mutable and elusive? I think I've rambled myself into a place where it's gonna be hard to extricate myself. Maybe we are talking at cross-purposes. Is the cat dead or alive? Can we ever KNOW? Will gravity ever fully be understood and seamlessly incorporated into The Theory of Everything? A Cal Berkeley mathematician, Peter Hintz, says that charged black holes can erase your past and provide you with an infinite number of futures. They can be "reset" buttons under certain specific circumstances. What does that do to what we "know"? Endlessly fascinating. I hope you can figure out what I'm trying to say here Durdle. If not no worries. I appreciate your input and Happy Monday! :)
Durdle 