The scientific method is not what it seems. According to Alison Jaggar in her articleLove and Knowledge: Emotion in Feminist Epistemology? there is amyth of dispassionate investigation? that is ignored if not rejected. Thisdispassionate investigation? is one separating rationality and emotion, claiming that while the former is an essential component in the epistemological process, the latter plays no role. It states that humans are able to remove emotional biases when investigating the validity of a hypothesis. Epistemology, along with many other areas in philosophy, was heavily influenced by the rise of modern science in the late middle ages. Positivism, epistemology based on the scientific process of hypotheses, testing, and conclusion, has come to dominate the field and is the area Jaggar addresses when speaking of thedispassionate investigation.? To a positivist as well as most others, it's obvious that when humans feel emotions they realize they have a tendency to act in a non-scientific fashion. If I feel angry, I can tell that my decisions are not going to be as ordered and fair as if I did not have this feeling exerting influence over me. My choices will be biased. It's obvious. In order for rationality to be pure, untainted, and thus, scientific, emotion must be removed from the course of investigation. Positivists believe that through scientific investigation of ontological problems they remove emotion from the equation, and with this method of investigation epistemology has become as close to a scientific search for knowledge as humanly possible. .
But, according to Jaggar, that is themyth? of it all. Humans cannot remove emotion from their studies; biases will always be present, whether the participant realizes them or not. If the philosopher does not realize these emotions, it does not mean she fails to experience them. ?lack of emotions certainly does not mean that emotions are not present subconsciously or unconsciously?? (p.
