SOCIAL SCIENCE AND ETHICAL NEUTRALITY

While some aspects of social investigation are carried out from intellectual curiosity alone, an underlying motive is often a desire to improve the way in which we live. Conflict analysis involves the study of how people behave with respect to conflict – in particular, war. Many scholars consciously and explicitly work in the discipline in order to reduce the amount of warfare in the belief that a fuller understanding of the phenomenon is a prior condition for effective action.

Social scientists who step out of the scientist's role and become advocates are automatically involved in a world of values and political commitment. One course of action is recommended in favour of another, which means evaluating the costs and consequences of the actions against each other in a moral sense. This view, which I accept and elaborate in this chapter, has unfortunately led to much confusion about the relation of values to science. In particular it is asserted that it is impossible to have a value-neutral social science in the sense (presumably) that the social science we produce and the propositions we believe in differ according to our values. I shall try to resolve these confusions in order to discuss more effectively the relationship of values to decisions.

I shall illustrate the problem initially in terms of an example from the natural sciences to keep the issues as clear as possible.