SOCIAL SCIENCE FOUNDED ON A UNIFIED NATURAL SCIENCE 483 



Relation of social science to other disciplines 



If we conceive social science in the manner just outlined we 

 maintain its autonomy and unique point-of-view, we thoroughly 

 justify both its tendency to seek a theoretical foundation and 

 its innate orientation to the analysis of concrete historical insti- 

 tutions, and we command its search to develop its own special 

 techniques. What is even more interesting is that by giving it 

 a clearly defined autonomy we remove the tensions which have 

 arisen between it and other disciplines. 



First of all, as has been emphasized, the social sciences are 

 seen to have a vital relation to natural science, yet are not a 

 mere part of natural science, nor to be judged by the same 

 standards. Next we can close the great gap which separates 

 modern social thought from the ancient social thought still 

 so influential in our culture. Until recent times social thinkers 

 spoke of the " moral sciences." Commonly they distinguished 

 three, the ethics of the individual, the ethics of the family, and 

 politics or the ethics of society. These were called " special 

 ethics," and the theoretical foundation which all three rested 

 was called " general ethics." These sciences were evaluative, 

 considering the relation of ends to means. Furthermore they 

 were founded on the concept of natural law, that is, that certain 

 goals are determined for human conduct by human nature itself, 

 while others are instituted by human choice and are to be 

 evaluated by their conformity as means to these fixed goals. 

 Our analysis shows that this conception is essentially the same 

 as that toward which the social sciences as we now know them 

 tend to gravitate as they gain their independence from natural 

 science. 



The break between the older and newer conception was due 

 to the fact that the ancient social thinkers had not developed 

 the techniques necessary to bring their general theory into con- 

 tact \vith historical description and experience .^^ It is signifi- 



' ^ The various attempts of Catholic sociologists to distinguish the social sciences 

 from the moral sciences (for which see P. H. Furfey, The Scope and Method of 

 Sociology (New York 1953) . Sister Miriam Lynch, O. S. U., " Communication be- 



