Zeteticism is simply a method of inquiry and it matters only how the experiment is set up and what is being tested.
Yay. Progress. We can remove the idea of a lack of bias for an experiment to be Zetetic.
From my being taught science as a kid, I would come up with a guess of what the result will be, test and observe, then reflect on how close my assumption is and whether it needs throwing out or tweaking.
What is the difference with the zetetic enquiry?
An example of zetetic inquiry is given above. In my experiments I only saw the earth rising upwards and the earth pushing me as I stood still. No 'gravitons' or 'bending space' were detected. I directly experienced one pushing phenomena while its competition was, and as is admitted by its proponents, unable to be tested. This is direct evidence that the earth is moving upwards.
Yet, the gravity proponents argue that "just because you don't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist," which is the same argument used to justify the existence of ghosts.
The fact is that most science is of this character: Dishonest and built with one hypothesis built upon the next in mumbling pretension.
The Scientific Method itself is biased. We are told to pick a hypothesis, test if it is true, and then make our conclusions off of that test. With this method we are only testing whether the hypothesis is true, not conducting basic inquisitive tests against reality to show us its possibilities and fundamental truths. The Scientific Method brings us to half truths.
In Astronomy, the situation is even worse! Astronomers generally do not use the Scientific Method at all when coming up with theories. The Scientific Method says to test your hypothesis. Astronomers do not conduct controlled tests on the universe to come up with their theories -- they cannot. And since Astronomy cannot, and does not, test the theories or conduct experiments with the cosmos to come to the truth of a matter, Astronomy is not a science. Astronomers are not scientists. The field is no different than Astrology, which is built on observation and interpretation.
Zetetics rightfully, and more honestly, characterize the unknown as unknown. This is the difference: Honesty