90 Research and National Purpose 



steps out of its own ground and treads into the area of value- 

 judgments, it starts to become something more than science, 

 and something which then begins to partake of the contro- 

 versial character of economics, or even of politics. 



Tradition has it that economists can never agree between 

 themselves about matters of economic policy, whereas scientists, 

 as scientists, always in the end agree about their own subjects. 

 Is there not a saying that if there were twelve economists in 

 a room discussing some field of economics, you would hear thir- 

 teen opinions expressed? If there were twelve scientists in a 

 room discussing a particular area of science, you would in the 

 end — at least theoretically — listen to only one opinion. The 

 reasons why economists immediately differ when discussing eco- 

 nomic policy are, according to a recent article by Fritz Mach- 

 lup,'^ fourfold. First, they are straightaway confronted hy 

 differences in semantics. The established rules of science are 

 there to help the scientist over that obstacle. Second, economists 

 are apt to differ from each other in logical approach. Here 

 again the scientist ought to be protected by the rules of the 

 game. Third, economists are very prone to differ in their factual 

 assumptions. Once more the advantage is to the scientist. And 

 finally economists differ because of differing value-judgments 

 associated with the aims of different courses of action. 



I hope that these differences between the social and the exact 

 sciences are merely a reflection of the fact that the latter are 

 further advanced in their formal evolution than is, say, the 

 subject of economics. I certainly see no logical reasons why, in 

 time, economists should not be provided with the basic scien- 

 ti,fic framework and apparatus of working which will be able 

 to impose the necessary discipline on subjective and wishful 

 thoughts, as is now possible within the body of science. 



But at the moment it is only when we come to value judg- 

 ments that in theory the scientist is exposed to the same blaze 

 of difficulties as the economist, with the added disadvantage 



7. Machlup, Fritz (1965). Why Economists Disagree Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc, 

 109, 1. 



