What exactly does " salsa dancing social science research" mean?

Further to our in-class discussion on the capital truth in the past Monday, I have looked up the Oxford and Longman online dictionaries for the identification of “truth”. Here are my findings:

(Oxford) “a fact or belief that is accepted as true”

(Longman) “an important fact or idea that is accepted as being true”

All I am trying to say here is that “truth” has to be “accepted” to be “true”. In my eyes, the most important part is about the notion of acceptance, which is contextualized by the truth believers based on their own social, cultural or political perspectives. Therefore, I am not surprised to see all kinds of “exceptions” alongside the “truths” all the time. To me, it is the perspective that matters.

So what kind of perspectives shall I hold to become a “salsa dancing social science researcher”? What exactly does “salsa dancing social science research” mean? Luker (2008) has briefly introduced the ideas of “public sociology” and “critical sociology” at the very beginning (2). Now that I am reading her book all the way down to Chapter 5, along with my exploration of her fascinating “working smarter” research methods and the various innovative online research databases, I cannot help tracing back to the identification of this “salsa dancing social science research”. Luker mentioned that a salsa dancing researcher is “the pioneering person” in his or her research area (83). Does it mean to challenge the main stream “truths” by bringing up those deemed as “exceptions” or “leftovers”? Does it need to have a political and anti-mainstream nature?