8 PHENOMENA, ATOMS, AND MOLECULES 



tion must be true or false implies that we attach absolute meanings to 

 words or concepts. If concepts have meanings only in terms of the opera- 

 tions used to define them we can see that they are necessarily fuzzy. Take, 

 for example, this statement, "Atoms are indestructible." Is this true or 

 false? The answer depends upon what aspect of atoms is considered. To 

 the chemist the statement is as true as it ever was. But a physicist, studying 

 radioactive changes, recognizes that some atoms undergo spontaneous dis- 

 integration or destruction. The fact is that the chemist and the physicist 

 have no exact definitions of the word "atom" and they also do not know in 

 any absolute sense what they mean by "indestructible." 



Fortunately such questions no longer occupy much of the time of scien- 

 tists, who are usually concerned with more concrete problems which they 

 endeavor to treat in common-sense ways. 



It is often thought by the layman, and many of those who are working 

 m so-called social sciences, that the field of science should be unlimited, 

 that reason should take the place of intuition, that realism should replace 

 emotions and that morality is of value only so far as it can be justified by 

 analytical reasoning. 



Human affairs are characterized by a complexity of a far higher order 

 than that encountered ordinarily in the field of science. 



To avoid alternating periods of depression and prosperity economists 

 propose to change our laws. They reason that such a change would elimi- 

 nate the cause of the depressions. They endeavor to develop a science of 

 economics by which sound solutions to such problems can be reached. 



I believe the field of application of science in such problems is ex- 

 tremely limited. A scientist has to define his problem and usually has to 

 bring about simplified conditions for his experiments which exclude unde- 

 sired factors. So the economist has to invent an "economic man" who 

 always does the thing expected of him. No two economists would agree 

 exactly upon the characteristics of this hypothetical man and any conclu- 

 sions drawn as to his behavior are of doubtful application to actual cases 

 involving human beings. There is no logical scientific method for deter- 

 mining just how one can formulate such a problem or what factors one 

 must exclude. It really comes down to a matter of common sense or good 

 judgment. All too often wishful thinking determines the formulation of 

 the problem. Thus, even if scientifically logical processes are applied to 

 the problem, the results may have no greater validity than that of the good 

 or bad judgment involved in the original assumptions. 



Some of the difficulties involved in a scientific approach to economic 

 problems is illustrated by the following: If we wish to analyze the cause 

 of a depression (or for example, a war) we should ask ourselves what we 

 mean by the word "cause" in this connection. In terms of operations the 



