Article Title：Is science neurotic? (Aims of inquiry, rationality, values)
Abstract：
Neurosis can be interpreted as a methodological condition from which any aim-pursuing entity can suffer. If such an entity pursues a problematic aim B but represents to itself that it is pursuing a different aim C and, as a result, fails to solve the problems associated with B which, if solved, would lead to the pursuit of aim A, then the entity may be said to be 'rationalistically neurotic'. Natural science is neurotic in this sense insofar as its basic aim is represented as improving knowledge of factual truth as such (aim C), when actually the aim of science is to improve knowledge of explanatory truth (aim B). Science itself does not suffer significantly from this neurosis, but philosophy of science does. Much more serious is the rationalistic neurosis of the social sciences and academic inquiry more generally. Freeing social science and academic inquiry from neurosis would have far-reaching beneficial, intellectual, institutional and cultural consequences.
Keywords: neurosis; physics; natural science; social science; aims of inquiry; rationality; psychoanalysis; metaphysics; values; philosophy of science; scientific method
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9973.00228
Source：METAPHILOSOPHY
Welcome to correct the error, please contact email: humanisticspider@gmail.com
