PEN-L message, Re: The Mind of Paul Krugman: Mahathir, Pinochet, bad men, goo

But we, in doing our jobs, like to distance
ourselves from the influence we have on things.

Well that's one loop I neglected in the argument - the idea that "scientific detachment" is required for objectivity. You might say, in order to be objective, there must be an object, and the object requires that we are "outside of it" and not "in it". But that's really just a Lakoffian metaphor, it's perfectly possible to be involved in a process and be objective nonetheless. Implicitly, the idea of the "objective policy analyst" who impartially evaluates alternative policy proposals by tracing the consequences each of them has, is also linked to the idea that precisely by leaving policy objectives to the politicians, and concentrating on the relative merits of various means to achieve them (instrumental rationality), "scientific detachment" is achieved. That is, scientific detachment equals that instrumental rationality. But it's not clear that this equation holds, other than in the limitation of personal responsibility. It would be better to define "scientific detachment" as the autonomy of scientific inquiry which seeks to establish the truth for its own sake, regardless of external interests that could bias its results in a scientifically unacceptable way. But in that case we do not escape from morals either, or some kind of code of professional conduct.

In the real world, of course, we have to deal with a specific social organisation of scientific research, which probably means that often this ethic can only be an ideal. The German Marxist historian and social commentator Leo Kofler developed the idea that as science becomes integrated into business, rationality becomes redefined as "technical rationality", i.e. an instrumental rationality. But he calls this an ideology which has a justifying role, in that it rationalises a specific form of social organisation compatible with business requirements, and which prevents certain questions from being asked, because they are not so compatible. See: Leo Kofler, Technologische Rationalität im Spätkapitalismus (1971). There's a site about his work at http://www.leo-kofler.de/ (I am not sure whether the term Spätkapitalismus (late capitalism) is really useful, insofar as we do not know yet when capitalism will end (this term was first used by Natalie Moszkowska in 1943, see by this author Zur Dynamik des Spätkapitalismus. Der Aufbruch, Zürich, 1943; the concept originates from the glory days of Marxism which advanced a perspective that we had entered the epoch of the world-historical decline of capitalism).

Jurriaan

Re: The Mind of Paul Krugman: Mahathir, Pinochet, bad men, good policies - and the 'job of economic analysts'