Does it matter that your personal circumstance influence how seriously your knowledge is taken?
The personal circumstance of a Biologist or a sculpture may tend to impact the significance of how seriously their knowledge is taken in the view of others. For instance, the value of someone who experts in human science are strong in theory because their work seems more evidential and reliable, but the interpretation from an artist such as a sculpture, their work can be seen as more powerful and objective. Even so, the circumstance for an artist can change from the instance the work can be perceived depending on the viewer, limiting or gaining more understanding for the knowledge being presented.
Very nice thinking.
So the scientific method has evidence, and how might we consider it to be reliable? What is done to/by the knowledge to cause us to rely upon it? As for a sculpture, maybe this is where the phrase “in the eye of the beholder” comes from? What generic objective clues does the artist need to provide for everyone to interpret the work in the way they want it received? Does this matter? Should/could we interpret things in our own way?