He probably does. Scientific enquiry depends on the tools we use... and on the perceptions we define it with.

Scientists often aim for objectivity, without realizing that because they are already a part of the world, they are subjectively affecting that world BY trying not to be subjective.

And then you have people bending over backwards to be "objective" and merely ending up being destructive instead. True objectivity is not actually possible. And yet the scientific method is based on being "objective"?

Bah humbug.