The March for Science apparently comes with its own particular version of the philosophy of science. This can be clearly seen when Jerry Coyne’s views of science are contrasted with other March supporters (and the March itself).
First, Coyne tells us that science works according to a universal toolkit that is used the same by everyone:
If we are to march, we should march in unity for truth, and against those who reject empirical truth. What unites all science—and makes it unique—is that it is a universal toolkit, used in the same way by members of all groups, regardless of gender, ethnicity, or religion. That is what holds us together.
But that’s not how the March for Science (MfS) views science. First, the MfS thinks ethnic and gender diversity is necessary for good science:
Science works best when scientists come from diverse perspectives, and we must work to encourage and support a new generation of scientists that increasingly includes historically underrepresented groups.
If the scientific toolkit is universal, and is used the same by everyone, why is it that “Science works best when scientists come from diverse perspectives?” Don’t get distracted by the moral question of science needing to be diverse. The question is whether such ethnic and gender diversity is needed to make science work at its best. If that is the case, Coyne’s universal toolkit perspective is fundamentally flawed.
In fact, the contrast becomes even more clear in another statement from the MfS:
Science is first and foremost a human process — it is conducted, applied, and supported by a diverse body of people. Scientific inquiry is not an abstract process that happens independent of culture and community.
This comes across as a denial of Coyne’s view. Coyne tells us science has a universal toolkit that is “used in the same way by members of all groups, regardless of gender, ethnicity, or religion.” Yet the MfS tells us that “scientific inquiry is not an abstract process that happens independent of culture and community.” Science is a “human process,” not the deployment of some “universal toolkit.” Science happens within the context of “culture and community,” not outside of it.
If you need something that is even more obvious yet, consider what biologist Emily Willingham wrote in her essay, “The March For Science In Washington Is Political Whether You Like It Or Not.”