The concept of value-neutrality in science is an ideal from the past, but in the modern world, value judgment and ethical responsibility are essential. Science must develop in a way that takes into account societal values, and scientists must constantly make value judgments and interact with society in the course of their research.
Rethinking value neutrality in science: the role of scientists in modern society
The concept of value-neutrality in science was originally coined by German sociologist Max Weber in his article Objectivity in Social Science and Social Policy Perception. It refers to the idea that scientific research should only study objective facts and exclude subjective value judgments. However, philosopher of science Thomas Samuel Kuhn’s Structure of the Scientific Revolution argued that science cannot be free of social values and historical context, but rather is a collaborative product of the value systems of individual scientists, their personal experiences, and historical contingencies. Because of these arguments, the concept of value-neutrality in science has been heavily criticized, and many scientists now agree that science is no longer value-neutral.
Limitations of value neutrality
The belief that science is objective and neutral was once considered central to the independence and credibility of scientific research. However, this belief in value neutrality has significant limitations. The history of science is not simply an accumulation of facts, but involves the development and accumulation of knowledge within a social context. For example, in research on bioethical issues, topics such as genetic manipulation or bioexperimentation are not just technical issues, but involve philosophical and ethical questions about human beings and life. If scientists try to exclude ethical issues by simply claiming “objectivity,” their research will not be trusted by society. The development of science is driven by societal needs and values, and the direction of research itself is determined by subjective judgments and societal needs. As a result, scientific research is inevitably associated with value judgments.
Rethinking the value-neutrality of modern science
Recognizing that science is no longer value-neutral in the modern world, I argue that instead of trying to restore value-neutrality, scientists must constantly make value judgments. In other words, science requires constant value judgments both in the research process and in the analysis of results, and the society of scientists should interact with the outside world to further advance science rather than maintain independence from it. The insistence on maintaining value neutrality is an anachronism that ignores the complexity and interconnectedness of modern society, and can be an irresponsible way for scientists to shirk their social responsibility. It is time for scientists to move beyond the philosophical question of whether science is value-neutral to consider the practical societal impacts and responsibilities that come with it. It is the role of modern scientists to consider the direction of their research in a social context and make appropriate value judgments accordingly.
Value judgments and the need for ethical responsibility
First of all, scientific research requires value judgments, both in the research process and in the analysis of research results. Modern science targets natural phenomena that are much more complex and vast than those of the pre-modern era, and we need to evaluate their impact on humanity. The methods we choose in the research process and the results we obtain require judgments that take into account not only the success of the experiment, but also the social ramifications. For example, in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) development, it’s important to keep in mind that advances in technology can have both positive and negative consequences, such as invasion of privacy and job losses.
In physics, if you conduct an experiment called “The Kinematics of Billiards” and find that the total kinetic energy before and after a collision is not conserved but decreases, rather than simply accepting the data as true, you need to re-examine the accuracy and validity of your research. This means that you need to make value judgments to reach the right conclusions, not just the results of an experiment. This value judgment, which considers the validity of the research process and the results of the research, is crucial for accurate research in modern science.
Modern science and ethical responsibility
In a modern society that is rethinking the value-neutrality of science, scientists need to consider their ethical responsibilities, as advances in science are no longer just technical achievements, but have direct and indirect impacts on humanity and nature. For example, advances in gene editing technology are likely to be useful in treating diseases, but there are also ethical issues and potential risks associated with the genetic manipulation of human embryos. If scientists ignore these ethical responsibilities and try to conduct research from a value-neutral position, their scientific achievements may have a negative impact. Therefore, scientists need to recognize these ethical responsibilities and make ethical judgments during the research process.
Scientists’ independence and social engagement
Scientists need to consider the impact of scientific research on society and form close relationships with the outside world. To preserve the value-neutrality of science, the scientific community should not be independent of modern society, but should constantly reflect on societal values and needs. Given that science and technology have been the driving force behind the expansion of capitalism and that scientific progress is an important driver of modern society, scientists should consider how their research and its results can create value for society.
If scientists ignore the social context and focus solely on research, this not only reduces the social value and practical utility of their research, but can also lead to isolation within the scientific community. It is essential for scientists to consider the social responsibility of their research, and to evaluate its value, in order to advance scientific research while strengthening their ties to society. Scientists need to make value judgments in their research processes and methods to conduct research that interacts with modern society.
Future directions of science
Science and technology have become powerful tools of influence in modern society. The future direction of science must be closely tied to social values, not just technological advancement, and scientists must make ethical judgments along the way, carefully evaluating societal benefits and potential risks. In an era where cutting-edge science and technology in various fields such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and environmental science are making a direct difference in human life, science must be reoriented toward ethical considerations and social contributions, rather than simply the pursuit of objective facts.
To achieve this orientation, scientists should pursue research that improves the quality of human life and achieves social harmony, rather than value neutrality as an absolute ideal. To solve the complex problems facing modern society, scientists need to make multiple value judgments and assume ethical responsibilities.
Conclusion
The value-neutrality of science is no longer sustainable in the modern world. Scientists must constantly make value judgments in the research process and in analyzing results, and they must stay in close contact with modern society to advance science. The anachronistic insistence on maintaining value neutrality is an irresponsible argument that avoids the social role of scientists, and scientists should fulfill the social responsibility of their research and contribute to humanity and society through ethical judgment. It is time for scientists to think about the value of their research in terms of its impact on humanity and society, and to open new horizons for modern science through responsible research and development.
