I found this bit interesting and made a few tweaks (in bold):
<< Note that the root problem I am identifying here is OBJECTIVISM. Objectivism is the definitive presupposition/belief that a phenomenon can exist independently from the context (energetic, spatial, temporal) it naturally includes and is included in.
Objectivism is based on an assumption about the universality of third-person perception that DISREGARDS both the relativity of perception and experiential evidence available from first and second person perception, dismissing this as ‘subjective’ or ‘mystic’. Hence it is not scientifically IMPARTIAL (i.e. comprehensive), as it claims to be, but profoundly BIASED. >>
What are other pesky root assumptions, and how do they relate to each other? Such as MATERIALISM and REDUCTIONISM… What is the real root of the problem here? Is this how best to think about the causes of narrowness of thinking by scientists?