Oh…I could type a lot about this, but I’ll try to save something for class. First of all, thanks very much for not deleting the opening rant, especially the phrase “saddle-bred pineapple.”
What is that?!?!?!?
Seriously, I think there’s lots of room for reflection and re-evaluation between your (Aaron’s) pointed lament about the futility of idealism (because you’ll never get there) and Krystalyn’s very self-aware and pragmatic assessment of the challenges of adjusting the framework when one is a product of and working within the system.
On the social science / objectivity issue: Yes, of course you strive for objectivity. You triangulate, develop deep samples, try to account for bias, deploy all of the tools in the kit that are designed to make what we do “scientific.” But objectivity is just as illusory as the ideal is. “Science” inevitably reflects and exercises the perspectives (qualitative, interpretive, humanistic, personal…..pick an adjective any adjective….) of the PEOPLE practicing it. We don’t use science we make it. And it shows. Thank goodness.
I hear your concern, but can’t embrace the despair — and honestly, (not to be agist about this) you are too young to despair! Self awareness, humility, compassion, expertise and commitment — it’s all we’ve got, but it’s a lot. The 21st century needs you — emotions and all.