On Value-laden observations

"All observation is theory-laden"

I believe this to be true. I do not, however, find this axiom to be problematic. I think most cases are like this ...

You look out your window on a winter day in Omaha and read the thermometer., it says 20 degrees (F). You also look at a little wind gage you have setup next to the thermometer, do a quick calculation, and determine that it will feel like 2 degrees (F) outside. You dress appropriately, you head to work.

"Temperature" is a term that, in the history of science, at least in the last 500 years, has never been exactly straight forward. It has been measured different ways which, at the margin, can give different results. The standard today deals with measuring the kinetic energy of a thing, but your average mecury thermometer is, relative to scientific standards of measurement, pretty inaccurate.

But so long as we remember what we want the measurement for (here the term "for" is used more in-line with Pierce than with Nietzsche), e.g. knowing what we need to wear to stay warm on the way to work. The measurement is non problematic. That is, even though the theory behind the mecury themometer and wind-chill calculations are not in any precise sense correct, the error caused by the theory is not problematic because we do not require the degree of precision, in this case, that the theory-laden observation cannot give us.

So ... we keep our eyes open to the potential for trouble, but rarely are we, even in day-to-day scientific work, working in a environment that needs to added precision ... that needs instruments derived from the most up-to-dat and most accurate scientific theory.