Rationality in Science and Politics PDF
Preview Rationality in Science and Politics
RA TIONALITY IN SCIENCE AND POLITICS BOSTON STUDIES IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE EDITED BY ROBERT S. COHEN AND MARX W. WARTOFSKY VOLUME 79 RA TI 0 N ALITY IN SCIENCE AND POLITICS Edited by GUNNAR ANDERSSON Universitiit Trier ... D. REIDEL PUBLISHING COMPANY A MEMBER OF THE KLUWER " ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS GROUP DORDRECHTj BOSTON j LANCASTER Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: Rationality in science and politics. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science; v. 79) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Science-Philosophy. 2. Science-Social aspects. 3. Rationalism. 4. Radnitzky, Gerard. I. Andersson, Gunnar, 1942- II. Series. Q174.B67 vol. 79 [Q175] 00i'.01s [149'.7] 83-21242 ISBN-I3: 978-90-277-1953-9 e-ISBN-I3: 978-94-009-6254-5 001: 10.1007/978-94-009-6254-5 The papers by Hans Albert, Paul Feyerabend, B. Kanitscheider, Kurt Salamun, and Ernst Topitsch were translated from the German by John Krois Published by D. Reidel Publishing Company, P.O. Box 17,3300 AA Dordrecht, Holland Sold and distributed in the U.S.A. and Canada by Kluwer Academic Publishers, 190 Old Derby Street, Hingham, MA 02043, U.S.A. In all other countries, sold and distributed by Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, P.O. Box 322, 3300 AH Dordrecht, Holland First published in 1984 in hardbound edition All Rights Reserved © 1984, 1985 by D. Reidel Publishing Company No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner To Gerard Radnitzky on His Sixtieth Birthday T ABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORIAL PREFACE ix PREFACE ~ GUNNAR ANDERSSON I Creativity and Criticism in Science and Politics 1 JOSEPH AGASSI I The Social Base of Scientific Theory and Practice 15 HANS ALBERT I Transcendental Realism and Rational Heuristics: Critical Rationalism and the Problem of Method 29 GUNNAR ANDERSSON I How to Accept Fallible Test Statements? Popper's Criticist Solution 47 W. W. BARTLEY, III I Logical Strength and Demarcation 69 PAUL K. FEYERABEND I Xenophanes: A Forerunner of Critical Rationalism? 95 ERNEST GELLNER I The Social Roots of Modern Egalitarianism 111 ADOLF GRONBAUM I Explication and Implications of the Placebo Concept 131 B. KANITSCHEIDER I Analytic and Synthetic Philosophy 159 NORETTA KOERTGE I Ethical Problems in Science Communication 191 HIROSHI NAGAI I A Philosophical Conception of Finality in Biol- ogy 205 MARCELLO PERA I The Justification of Scientific Progress 221 KARL R. POPPER I Against Induction: One of Many Arguments 245 KURT SALAMUN I The Problem of Ideology and Critical Ration- alism 249 IRENA SZUMILEWICZ-LACHMAN I Poincare versus Le Roy on Incommensurability 261 ERNST TO PITSCH I On Early Forms of Critical Rationalism 277 GUNNAR ANDERSSON I Gerard Radnitzky: From Positivism, via Critical Theory, to Critical Rationalism 289 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS 297 INDEX OF NAMES 301 EDITORIAL PREFACE This remarkable collection of essays, diverse but united by the theme of critical reasoning, testifies to the attention and respect paid by the authors to the philosophical career of Gerard Radnitzky. We, too, greet Professor Radnitzky for his decades of intellectual labor devoted to the establishment of rational analysis of human problems. Not least of his concerns has been to understand what it is to be rational, to disentangle the apparently rational and the genuine, to separate dogma from justified belief, to cherish imagination while seeking its test. If Radnitzky has long been known for his careful elaboration of the spectrum of modem approaches to epistemology, those who have gathered to celebrate his work in this volume will also be widely known for their own writings on this matter of critical methodology. Their signposts (or are they warning lights?) will be familiar to thoughtful philosophers and scientists, and they appear as queries as we read these papers: the rational heuristic and the irrational heuristic? accepting the fallible? differing societies but one rational cognitive practice? accepting evidence which is placebogenic? choosing among the incommensurables? what remains of the logic of demarcation? purpose in nature? progress of science? rationality in politics? a humane reasonableness and a critical rationalism? Gunnar Andersson sets the focus well for the reader. We need not choose between dogmatism and relativism, he argues. And then he tells the political lesson: we might avoid both anarchy and despotism. We ourselves need not wholly agree as to the power of clear and critical thinking in social affairs to applaud Andersson's hope. And we too may hope that a critical scientific approach to human problems will bring practical reason together with af firmative traditions. How far rationality will take us, faced as we are by seemingly endless conflicts and scarcities, is far from certain, but to find the power and the role of rationality in our sciences of nature and of humankind is a crucial step toward self-dependence. January 1984 Center for Philosophy and History of Science ROBER T S. COHEN Boston University Department ofP hilosophy MARX W. WARTOFSKY Baruch College, City University of New York PREFACE The present collection of papers has been edited to honour Gerard Radnitzky on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday in July 1981. Editorial complications have delayed the appearance of the volume. The collected papers are grouped around Radnitzky's own interest in philosophy of science and political philosophy. The papers of Hans Albert, Paul Feyerabend, B. Kanitscheider, Kurt Salamun, and Ernst Topitsch were originally written in German. I wish to thank Dr. John Krois for having translated them into English. Trier, October 1982 GUNNAR ANDERSSON GUNNAR ANDERSSON CREA TIVITY AND CRITICISM IN SCIENCE AND POLITICS 1. THE DUALISM BETWEEN FACTS AND VALUES Are there any important similarities between rational ways of solving pro blems in such different areas as science and politics? The aim of science is to describe the world hypothetically, to tell us what there is. The aim of politics is to bring about a desirable social organization. In this area problems about what ought to be are fundamental, and hence politics has a moral dimension transcending science. The dualism between is and ought, between facts and values, makes the idea that there are important similarities between scientific and political rationality problematic. Such ideas are often regarded as ex pressions of scientism, of the modern illusion that all problems can be solved by science and technology. The dualism between facts and values makes it impossible to solve moral and political problems with science and technology alone. Science describes the world hypothetically and can help us to find technological means which are efficient in order to realize given ends. Science and technology has to do with the rationality of means. Hence knowledge is power. How should this knowledge be used? Which ends should be realized with our technological means? These moral and political problems go beyond the sphere of science and technology. They have to do with rationality of ends. Rationality of ends is more important than rationality of means. Efficient means can be used in very different ways. Our present situation with very efficient means of destruction and with means of production with con siderable negative ecological side effects makes the ambiguous character of rational means very clear. The dualism between facts and values has led many modern philosophers to think that there is a radical dualism between science and politics and that they belong to totally different dimensions. Some philosophers concentrate on scientific problems and do not think that much can be said about moral and political problems. Other philosophers think that the exclusive con centration on scientific and technological rationality has led to a situation in which efficient means of production and destruction are used in a rather irrational way. They think that the very important dimension of morals and Gunnar Andersson (ed.) , Rationality in Science and Politics, 1-14. © 1984 by D. Reidel Publishing Company. 2 GUNNAR ANDERSSON politics has been forgotten or exorcized by a superficial scientistic and positivistic criticism. As to the problem how moral and political problems should be solved, most modem philosophers maintain that ultimately they are solved by a decision to accept certain values, standards, and ends. Polar philosophical schools such as positivism and existentialism agree on this point. In positivism the emotional and non-scientific character of this choice is emphasized, in existentialism its autonomous and committing character. In both schools it is problematic in what sense such political and ethical choices can be said to be· rational. In critical rationalism it is also maintained that moral and political pro blems ultimately are solved by decisions. But it is denied that such decisions have to be arbitrary or irrational. According to this philosophy decisions are necessary not only in politics but also in science. In science there is no method leading to absolute truth, but we have to choose which hypotheses to accept. Such choices should be made on the basis of a critical examination of the hypotheses discussed, especially on the basis of an examination of their testable consequences. Criticism and investigation of consequences are important not only in science but also in politics in order to be able to choose and decide in a rational way. Not only in science but also in politics there is a vast difference between an arbitrary and blind choice, and a reasoned choice made with open eyes and with full awareness of consequences and alternatives. Thus criticism is important for rational choice both in science and in politics. There is a second similarity between science and politics. In science there is no method leading automatically to new hypotheses, but creative imagina tion is necessary in order to fmd something new. In politics creativity is equally necessary in order to fmd solutions to political problems, in order to be able to make political proposals. Both in science and politics a rational way of solving problems consists in an interplay between creativity and criticism. Possible solutions of pro blems are found by creative imagination and have to be critically examined. Creativity and criticism are not opposed but complement one another, and their interplay is essential for any branch of human culture. To maintain that creativity and criticism are important both in science and politics is not an expression of scientism. It is not maintained that science alone can solve all kinds of political problems, or that the same kind of creativity or criticism is needed in both areas. It is only maintained that there are important similarities between rational ways of solving problems
The list of books you might like
