RETHINKING SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVITY IN THE AGE OF ALGORITHMIC MEDIATION: A PHILOSOPHICAL INQUIRY
DOI:
10.47353/satukata.v4i1.4601Published:
2025-12-31Downloads
Abstract
The concept of scientific objectivity has long been regarded as the epistemic cornerstone of modern science, grounded in neutrality, reproducibility, and observer-independence. However, the rapid integration of algorithmic systems, artificial intelligence, and data-driven infrastructures into scientific processes has fundamentally transformed how knowledge is produced, validated, and disseminated. This paper offers a philosophical inquiry into the evolving nature of scientific objectivity in the age of algorithmic mediation. It argues that objectivity is no longer solely a function of human rationality and methodological rigor but is increasingly co-constructed by computational systems that embed implicit biases, design assumptions, and socio-technical constraints. Drawing on contemporary philosophy of science, digital epistemology, and critical algorithm studies, this study critically examines how algorithmic mediation reshapes epistemic authority, transparency, and accountability in scientific practices. Using a descriptive qualitative approach, the paper synthesizes theoretical perspectives to propose a reconceptualization of objectivity as a relational and situated construct rather than an absolute ideal. The findings suggest that algorithmic systems simultaneously enhance and undermine objectivity by increasing analytical capacity while obscuring interpretive processes. Consequently, this paper calls for a reflexive framework of “augmented objectivity,” where human judgment and algorithmic processes are critically integrated. Such a framework emphasizes transparency, ethical design, and epistemic responsibility, ensuring that scientific knowledge remains trustworthy in increasingly automated environments.
Keywords:
Scientific Objectivity Algorithmic Mediation Digital EpistemologyReferences
Angwin, J. (2016). Machine bias. ProPublica.
Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. (2016). Big data’s disparate impact. California Law Review, 104(3), 671–732.
Beer, D. (2017). The social power of algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 1–13.
Bijker, W. E. (2017). The social construction of technology. MIT Press.
Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679.
Burrell, J. (2016). How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, 3(1).
Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. Zone Books.
Floridi, L. (2014). The fourth revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press.
Gillespie, T. (2014). The relevance of algorithms. In T. Gillespie, P. Boczkowski, & K. Foot (Eds.), Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society (pp. 167–194). MIT Press.
Gitelman, L. (Ed.). (2013). Raw data is an oxymoron. MIT Press.
Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge University Press.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.
Introna, L. D. (2016). Algorithms, governance, and governmentality: On governing academic writing. Information Technology & People, 29(1), 17–49.
Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. Sage.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press.
Leonelli, S. (2016). Data-centric biology: A philosophical study. University of Chicago Press.
Mackenzie, A. (2017). Machine learners: Archaeology of a data practice. MIT Press.
Mittelstadt, B. D. (2019). Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(11), 501–507.
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown Publishing.
Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.
Porter, T. M. (1995). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press.
Ruppert, E. (2015). Data practices. Big Data & Society, 2(1).
Shapin, S. (1994). A social history of truth: Civility and science in seventeenth-century England. University of Chicago Press.
Star, S. L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 377–391.
Van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 197–208.
Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121–136.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Usman Jayadi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Downloads
How to Cite
