The ‘Scientific Stance’, best known in popular expression as ‘Objectivity’, was known in the early Dharmic literature as: ‘Seeing things as they are’ [Sakshat, Yatha Bhutam..] before the vocabulary was hijacked by mystical obscurantists.
Formal Meditation Practice birthed from it, the disciplined cultivation of a tested stance to: ‘See without obstruction’.
As long as there is a presumption of a Separated ‘Self’ there will be obstruction. The platform of the ‘Scientific Stance’ might yet put us back on the path to Shūnyam.
What is it about this word ‘Objective’? Why does everybody and his aunt want to be ‘Objective’?
It’s like if you weren’t objective, you believed in Santa Claus [whose hard to locate these days, fearing gender and race discrimination lawsuits]. Even Art Critics hint at objective criteria for high-art, known of course only to the Critic.
There is no a priori reason why ‘Objectivity’ is any better than ‘Subjectivity’. It simply reflects the muted suspicion that Truth is independent of me and my views. That Truth is quite indifferent, happily so, to the Subject and its pretenses.