Committed to Non-Judgmental Science?

Current Justification and Significance of the Postulate of Non-Judgmental Science

That science is non-judgmental in terms of value is generally regarded as a necessary pre­requi­site for the objec­tiv­ity and special value of scientific knowledge. Neither the values of the scientists themselves nor the social pur­poses for which science is used should be a condition for scientific knowledge. The postulate of non-judgmental science thus prevents science from being overloaded with societal expectations of practical orientation as well as the politiciza­tion or even ideologization of its findings. If value judgements cannot be scientifically justi­fied, they fall solely within the remit of the “responsible” authorities, be it politics, religion or other “providers” of values and value decisions.
Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that this ideal of an objective, non-judgmental science is in tension with the social demands that are placed on science and scientists alike: Scientists are expected to contribute to solving societal problems. An essential purpose – especially of the humanities and social sciences – was and is seen in providing practical orientation. At the same time, we see that socio-political value decisions are often guided by science. Politics in particular is often reliant on scientific expertise, even legitimizing its decisions with a scien­tific lack of alternatives. Nevertheless, this ideal of objective, non-judgmental science is in conflict with the social demands placed on science and scientists. The humanities and social sciences in particular are expected to contribute to solving social problems. In add­ition, scientific findings often serve as the basis for socio-political decisions, e.g. in politics, which frequently relies on scientific expertise.
The tension between the idea of non-judgmental science and social reality was recently demon­stra­ted particularly clearly by the role of science during the coronavirus pandemic. Here, various branches of science such as epide­mi­ol­ogy, virology, law and ethics have exerted considerable political influence. The desire for scientific explana­tions and recommendations was countered by the fear that scientific findings could replace political discourse. Another current example is anthropogenic climate change, where the call to “Follow the science!” raises the question of the non-judgmental nature of science.
Fundamental questions about the relationship between value and truth, fact and opinion, being and ought are at stake here. And is an open question whether and to what extent scientists should pursue socio-political objectives and what dangers the politicization of science entails, especially when it supports processes of social change.
The research project “Committed to Non-Judgmental Science? Current Justification and Significance of the Postulate of Non-Judgmental Science” explores these questions from an interdisciplinary perspective.