Skip to main content
Log in

Kuhn's impossibility proof and the moral element in scientific explanations

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Thomas S. Kuhn and others have arrived at the conclusion that at certain stages of investigation scientists cannot have recourse to criteria by which to justify their choices and actions. From this they have inferred that the choices made at these stages cannot be justified, leaving the impression that scientists may not be responsible for acting in some (sound, right, correct) as opposed to other (wrong, unsound, incorrect) ways in those circumstances. Kuhn's judgment is that in the last analysis it is so called subjective aesthetic considerations that will determine the actions taken.

In this paper I argue that Kuhn fails to consider criteria of justification not provided by some field of science itself. He appears even to reject the possibility of invoking such “field-invariant” (S. Toulmin's term) criteria. He also seems to reject recourse to metaphysical first principles, without even giving these a polite perusal. Finally he does not allow for any possible moral element within these types of human activities - i.e., people faced with dilemmas in or out of science.

I end by indicating how we might approach the Kuhnean type of choices and actions from within a moral perspective. The notion of acting as guided by moral rules is rejected since in “stress” cases the same problems occur here as do with paradigm selections namely we are left without rules. I suggest that the moral element consists, broadly, in exerting the effort needed to find solutions, in moral integrity, conscientiousness or the like. Mainly, however, I argue that how this moral element is to be characterized (identified) will in such cases have to await the occurrence of the dilemma and its solution. That is its uniqueness. But it does not exclude the possibility that once these cases have emerged, they should be discovered to require a given approach, not another. This, in turn, allows that the actions to be taken be justifiable and even that those who face the situation are responsible to discover how to act under the circumstances.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Machan, T.R. Kuhn's impossibility proof and the moral element in scientific explanations. Theor Decis 5, 355–374 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00167589

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00167589

Keywords

Navigation