Goodall explains what she thinks is wrong with too much science — a deficiency of empathy — in this video for the Secret Life of Scientists and Engineers.
I think she’s right — if you’re an ethologist or psychologist or sociologist or anyone who studies behavior. But a lot of scientists aren’t doing those sorts of things: if you’re a cardiac physiologist, for instance, empathizing with the whole animal can distract you from the task at hand; William Harvey did not puzzle out the flow of blood through the circulatory system by hugging a dog and empathizing with its heart. There is a necessary distancing from the subject, and sometimes you’re dealing with phenomena that don’t warrant empathy — do we really have to feel for goosecoid expression to understand early axis formation in vertebrate embryos? Isn’t there a danger of anthropomorphizing phenomena that really don’t have a human analog?
On the other hand, though, there is also the peril of extending that distancing too far. The example she gave, of giving chimpanzees numbers instead of names, is a good example of trying to oversimplify and reduce complex organisms to interchangeable units. It doesn’t work. It gives an illusion of objectivity to a process that is all about trying to understand very subjective behaviors.
Also, William Harvey did some dreadfully painful experiments on dogs, and could have benefitted from a little more empathy for his experimental subjects.