Journalism and science have long been stalking harmful trends
Claas Relotius, until recently one of the flagship journalists of the Federal Republic, awarded numerous prizes and honors, has invented substantial parts of his coverage or simply forged.
According to his own statement, Relotius was concerned with coping with the immense “pressure” and, despite everything, completing impossible-to-appear reportage jobs. On the other hand, the nature of many of his counterfeits points in a different direction: for it was less about facts than about feelings that were to coincide with the political-ideological aim of the article.
The emotional spelling is not limited to the media system, but also exists in many cases in science: Especially in emotionally charged topics such as the refugee, the environment or gender equality policy, care should be taken to describe the facts as such and not from For example, when scientific action is strongly emotionally influenced, scientific knowledge threatens to be lost.
Get out of the emotional trap
Everyone has emotional imprints and values. The question of whether science should serve these values or limit itself to identifying facts and logical inferences is one of the basic conflicts of the field.
There are only subjective answers, and the suggestions of both sides can coexist: should science contribute actively to the (whatsoever) improvement of human life, or should it focus on research and leave the use of its results to society?
It is clear that students are well advised to refrain from excessive emotionalizing their work. Because such a style suggests that may also be made suitable, which does not fit – for example in the form of a neglect of results that does not support the desired statement.
Academic ghostwriters usually know the problem very well and focus on the rational-logical aspects of a topic.