Laudans Theory of Scientific Aims Essay -- Laudan Science Utopia Argu

Laudans Theory of Scientific AimsI criticize Laudans constraints on cognitive aims as presented in apprehension and Values. These constraints are axio perspicuous unanimity and non-utopianism. I argue that (i) Laudans prescription for non utopian aims is too restrictive because it excludes ideals and characterizes as irrational or non-rational numerous human contingencies. (ii) We aim to ideals because there is no cogent way to specify in advance what degree of divagation from an ideal is acceptable. Thus, one cannot dispense with ideals. (iii) Laudan does not distinguish difficult from unrealizable goals, making his injunction against utopianism imprecise. It is semantically utopian and, furthermore, a prescription for conservativism and mediocrity. (iv) Goals often contradict each other or are at least partially incompatible. Since Laudan does not say how to prioritize incompatible aims, axiological consonance is an utopian desideratum. Thus, his constraints on cognitive aims contradict one another. Finally, (v), Laudans axiological constraints are too weak and in order to strengthen them, he must invoke without justification some implicit pre-philosophical cognitive aims. This opens the logical possibility of axiological relativism, which Laudan attempted from the beginning to avoid. Laudans Theory of AimsIn Science and Values, Laudan has developed the view that our scientific aims can sometimes be rationally selected by imposing two constraints (1) on them1. they should be jointly consistent,2. a pragmatic constraint of empirical realizability, or non-utopianism. This last requisite follows from Laudans means-ends conception of rationality,To adopt a goal with the feature that we can reckon of no actions... ...victory, one obtained by just means, i.e., the means employed should not constitute a greater evil than the evil the war was think to remedy.(13) Since some axiological inconsistencies can be only pragmatic, it is not always clear whether som e collection of ideals is mutually inconsistent.(14) Cf., N. Rescher, The Strife of Systems, chapters 7 & 8.(15) When this happens, our concupiscent nature give decide what our intellect cannot adequately settle.(16) Laudancs meta-aim of axiological consistency is a goal doubt of being demonstrably utopian, because it is not likely that we will ever have a theory of rational value priorizations. So it is not reasonable by Laudans meta-methodology own standards. If so, Laudans theory would be suspect of being self-referentially inconsistent.(17) Cf., Laudan, 1996, Beyond Positivism and Relativism, p. 16