I feel that a lot of people have this assumption, unconscious or not, that the world is entirely objective. That everything can be measured, and what isn't measurable doesn't exist. I think this belief (which essentially elevates the scientific method to a religion) is causing a huge amount of grief in the world.
It is critical that subjective, experiential data is cross referenced with objective data in order to control for errors in both. Both kinds of data are fallible for different reasons.
In my opinion, the erosion of subjectivity from science is probably a driver of the loss of objectivity in politics.
Why is this? In my opinion it’s because science has rejected people’s subjective experience for too long, to the point where science has become just “someone else’s opinion”. I can think of three examples From the past decade, off the top of my head.
Gluten make you feel yukky? Nonsense, said Science, only people with celiac disease can be gluten intolerant... oh wait, there are other types of gluten intolerance? Who knew?
Qualms about GM? Nonsense, said Science, what we’re doing is perfectly safe... oh wait, GM crops can unexpectedly spread into non GM paddocks, ruining a bunch of farmers? Who knew?
Prefer organic food? Nonsense says Science, pesticides are safe and harmless... oh wait, all the bees are dying from Neonicotinoids? Who knew?
It’s not that there is anything wrong with the scientific method, but scientists who run around and demean people’s subjective view of the world - right or wrong - have IMO really contributed to the current crisis of faith in science. People’s subjective opinion and experience must necessarily be taken into account, since that’s part of their lived experience and what we are here to explain. You don’t have to believe everything people tell you, but you do have to listen and be tolerant.
It’s like a special application of Goodhart’s law, “if we haven’t already seen it, it doesn’t exist”. As a huge fan of the scientific method, this attitude makes me very sad.
It's logical: in the renaissance a single individual could still hold 'all of science' in their heads, by the early 1900's that had split up into a whole bunch of domains each of which a single individual could still comprehend in their entirety. By the mid 1970s I don't think any single scientist still had complete command of their domain and that has only gotten worse.
It was bound to happen sooner or later, and this is not a sad thing per se, more of a measure of how far we have come and how quickly we've done that. The scientific method is the most amazing invention we've done, it succeeded where everything else has failed at explaining how the world and in fact much of the universe works.
A better phrasing of the problem is: the world is immensely complicated and our individual and collective intelligences have only just begun to scratch the surface of this complexity.
Once an individual understands this, they realize that almost everything in life cannot be measured or predicted, and that subjectivity is still very important and a completely valid way to navigate life.
Theory of science shows us that this statement is a belief. Whether you believe it or not can be argued about, but it can never be proven or disproven, much like the question whether God exists.
Personally, I believe the opposite - that there are some things that even in theory, even with the best and most advanced technology, can't be measured.