The Aim and Structure of Applied Research Author(s): Ilkka Niiniluoto Source: Erkenntnis (1975-), Vol. 38, No.

1 (Jan., 1993), pp. 1-21 Published by: Springer Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20012453 . Accessed: 14/10/2011 01:18
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Erkenntnis (1975-).

http://www.jstor.org

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

THE AIM AND APPLIED

STRUCTURE RESEARCH

OF

ABSTRACT.

The distinction is notoriously basic and applied between research vague, use in science cases it is based its frequent In most studies and in science policy. despite on such pragmatic or the type and intentions of the investigator factors as the knowledge institute. the validity of the distinction of research Sometimes is denied This altogether. that there are two ways of distinguishing between basic and paper suggests systematically by research: (i) in terms applied to the structure reference applied sense): should that define the aims of inquiry, and (ii) claims. An knowledge type of important norms" research aims at results that are expressed by "techical (in von Wright's to achieve Af and you believe if you wish B, then you you are in a situation of the relevant This conception philosophy, of "design and ethics of sciences" science. allows us to re-evaluate many issues of the "utilities"

do X.

in the history,

1.

BASIC

AND

APPLIED

RESEARCH DISTINCTION

A NEGLECTED

have mostly been concerned with sciences which explain Philosophers and interpret the world; now it is time to pay attention also to sciences which change the world. This remark may sound a little pathetic, but it conveys an important truth. The most of science in our age - both influential philosophers - have within the analytical and hermeneutical traditions usually their analyses of the aims and methods of inquiry upon grounded models by such basic sciences as mathematics, provided physics, bi? and sociology. Much less attention has been ology, history, psychology, devoted to fields like applied mathematics, computer science, aeroplane forest technology, engineering, dairy science, agricultural chemistry, veterinary medicine, sport medicine, pharmacy, nursing science, logop social policy studies, household edics, didactics, homiletics, economics, science, peace research, and future studies. library science, military This neglect by philosophers of course with some notable excep? tions1- is both surprising and harmful in many ways. In the first place, the students of the more exotic "practical sciences" may of course learn important lessons about science by reading Carnap, Hempel,
Erkenntnis ?

Popper,
38:

Kuhn,

Lakatos,

Feyerabend,

Laudan,

Stegm?ller,

1993 Kluwer

1993. 1-21, Academic Publishers.

Printed

in the Netherlands.

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

and other important authorities. But it is by no means Ruse, Apel, clear that conceptions of the basic sciences founded upon the model would do justice to the peculiar characteristics of the applied sciences. the converse error has been committed Secondly, by the instrumen? and Marxists, talist philosophers by many pragmatists (represented and Habermas)2 who treat all science as Bemal, among them Dewey, if it were applied. An extreme expression of this trend is the claim that is to be identified with the techniques of practical the Scientific Method in Operations Research.3 problem-solving of basic and applied its frequent use, the distinction Thirdly, despite in a vague and confusing way within science research is often presented instrumentalism among together with the fashionable policy. This fact - has led to an the category of makers drift",4 whereby "epistemic policy seems to fading away or melting into that of fundamental research research. applied to distinguish basic and applied the failure (or refusal) Fourthly, and sociologists historians of science astray research has led many as the "ideology" of "pure in their criticisms of what they regard
science".5

2.

PRAGMATIC

OR

SYSTEMATIC

DIFFERENCE?

between basic and applied research was codi? The standard distinction research is defined as the in 1966.6 First, within R&D, fied by OECD uses the results of research to while development of knowledge, pursuit and means of production". Secondly, develop "new products, methods, basic research is defined as "the systematic pursuit of new scientific and ap? without the aim of specific practical application", knowledge with the aim of obtaining plied research as "the pursuit of knowledge a specific goal". in is systematic between The distinction research and development in their products: knowledge the sense that it is couched as a difference is vaguely based upon vs. artefacts. But the basic-applied distinction whose aims are in the "aims" of research - without any specification question. to separate basic and applied research appeal Most of the attempts features that may vary in time to pragmatic factors, i.e., to contextual of an and location. Examples of such factors include the knowledge has in his or her mind a individual scientist ("the applied researcher

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

of basic personal motives ("the motive possible practical application"), research is pure curiosity, that of applied research utility"), the inten? tions of the funding institutions ("applied research is financed because of its economic utility"), research sites ("basic research is done in the business schools, and universities, applied research in the polytechnics, industrial laboratories"), and the speed of utilization ("strategic basic in the long run, mission-oriented research leads to practical applications research in the short run"). Criteria of this sort are vague, ambiguous, with and incompatible each other.7 The same activity may be classified as basic research on one criterion, that the It is no wonder applied research on another. of these distinctions if often doubted or denied. It is, therefore, to ask whether important they could be replaced by some non-pragmatic division. In this paper, I look for a systematic in two di? distinction rections: (i) the "utilities" that define the aims, progress, and rationality of inquiry, and (ii) the structure or logical form of the knowledge validity
claims.

3.

BASIC

SCIENCE

AND

EPISTEMIC

UTILITIES

as the activity of the Basic or fundamental research can be understood scientific community to produce new scientific knowledge by means of the scientific method. should provide answers to cogni? This knowledge tive problems: it should describe, with as good justification as possible, what the world (i.e., nature, man, culture, society) is like. The success of this activity thus depends on the amount and the correctness of the obtained information about the world. Basic science can thereby be as the attempt to maximize characterized the "epistemic of utilities" truth and information - or, as their weighted truthlike combination,
ness.8.

This description of basic research the course of scientific follows to realism, the primary realism.9 According task of basic science is the so far best results of science give us the elements of a cognitive: world view. Knowledge about the current state dynamically developing and the regularities of the world also allows us to explain and understand reality.10 In treating truth, information, and explanatory power as epistemic a scientific realist does not claim that they constitute the inten? utilities, tional goals of individual scientists or the motives of funding institutions.

4 Rather,

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

virtues which define the success and they are the cognitive force in the sense that of inquiry. They also have normative progress or theory may appeal the arguments for or against a scientific hypothesis to its cognitive status in the light of the available evidence - not, only or economic to moral, factors. the Indeed, e.g., religious, political, standard methods of scientific inquiry (e.g., sampling and experimental so that they tend statistical methods) have been designed techniques, to promote the cognitive goals of realism. and sociologists of science have been keen to show Many historians that real-life scientific work does not always fit the picture drawn by realism.11 These studies have given us valuable (in the realist's sense!) new information about scientific practice. realism, they seem to involve two flaws. First, But, as a criticism of scientific

a normative do not of behavior violating command examples norm: for example, the criminal acts do not disprove criminal disprove law. A norm is shown to be invalid only if its violation is not punished the normative force of the sanction.12 To disprove by the associated it should be shown that their viol? utilities of basic science, epistemic in public, does not lead to any sanction. But ation, when uncovered and ethical norms of science: this is not the case with the methodological of data, or bias if someone is found to be guilty of fraud, manipulation on political, or against a hypothesis in favor racist, sexist, nationalist, the credibility of his or her arguments grounds, religious, or economic or at least seriously weakened within the scientific will be demolished community. of "pure" or the arguments against the "false ideology" Secondly, choices of the value-laden science often involve examples "objective" or social policies.13 However, the study between medical technologies to applied rather than basic science of such topics belongs and, as we is research there is a sense in which shall see (Section 9), applied to epistemic utilities and restricted not "value free" (i.e., normatively in the same way as basic research. languages) descriptive

4.

TECHNOLOGY

AND

PRACTICAL

UTILITIES

and social artefacts By technology Imean the design and use of material as tools in the interaction with and the transformation which function of of reality.14 The word 'technology' may also refer to the products

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

this activity.

In this sense,

'development'

is a name

for science-based

technology. the linguistic products of scientific research, tools and artefacts Unlike are not true or false. Rather, they are intended to create new powers of action, and thereby to increase man's positive and possibilities free? dom. Hence, the basic "technological relative to utility" is effectiveness the intended use (e.g., the power of an engine). Besides creating new resources the use of tools consumes and has intended possibilities, effects on the material and unintended and social reality. Therefore, can (and should!) be assessed also in terms of their eco? technologies (relation of costs and effects) and their ergonomical aesthetic, ethi? (man-nature relations), ecological (man-tool relations), cal, and social aspects. It is important to emphasize here the crucial difference the between a scientific hypothesis or a new technological to "accept" decisions to develop tool. The decisions and use, e.g., nuclear power plants, or missiles means in effect the introduction of fertilizers, agricultural new artificial entities are inherently in the world - and therefore they value-laden, i.e., their rationality depends on the balance of their practi? cal utilities and disutilities. On the other hand, even though the accept? ance of a scientific theory (e.g., theory of evolution, theory of relativity) nomical efficiency may also have independent indirect social effects, such a theory has a truth value of our opinions, interests, and negotiations.
5. APPLIED SCIENCE

and forestry sciences, medical sci? sciences, Engineering agricultural as examples of ences, and practical social sciences are often mentioned basic science and technology, applied sciences. Falling between they which is intended to be useful for the specific produce new knowledge the effectiveness of some human activity. The purpose of increasing as a tool. Hence, functions the value of the results produced knowledge of such applied sciences and practical utilities. As applied science for their correctness, can be evaluated both in terms of epistemic

aims at knowledge, informativeness, -

quirement of practical applicability to basic science relevant utilities with simplicity or manageability.15

its products should be assessed But the re? truthlikeness. suggests that besides the epistemic and

applied science is also concerned The choice of the simplest among

6 equally human well

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

if it will be used as a resource in supported hypotheses, reasons. to be justifiable by economic is often assumed action, to make the calculations easier or practically possible, Further, approxi? to quantitative and simplifications laws mations may be introduced even at the expense of their truthlikeness.16 Beside provided by applied science epistemic utility, the knowledge to have instrumental value for the associated human activity. is expected calls the "technical science is thus governed by what Habermas Applied to the world. But to extend this conception interest" of controlling basic natural science as well, and thereby to treat all natural science as to instrumentalism.17 it were applied, is to commit oneself It might be objected that the double assessment and by epistemic - is since there is a conceptual utilities here, practical superfluous is a criterion of a connection between them. It is true that "practice the pragmatic success of a theory in guiding human action theory", i.e., is a fallible indicator of its cognitive virtues. But the truth of a theory success: e.g., it of applied science implies only its potential pragmatic a theoretical for an edu? that someone makes may happen proposal cational reform, which would have its claimed effect, but this proposal In this sense, it is possible that there is is actually never implemented. in applied science which is not, nor will be, cashed cognitive progress out in practice. The interplay of epistemic and practical utilities can also be illustrated terms. Suppose we are interested in the health in decision-theoretic linear and and a choice has to be made between risks of radiation, If the problem is purely theoretical, models.18 quadratic dose-response could be equated with its distance model then the loss of a mistaken in the adoption of from truth. But if the model will be implemented the public and workers safety standards, with the interest of protecting to give then the loss function could be transformed in nuclear facilities, in the direction of lower risk estimates. higher penalties so far has not yet helped to understand the relations Our discussion basic and applied research, and it has not clarified the crucial between value. To issue of how a piece of knowledge may have instrumental the analysis of applied science in terms of its these questions, approach to try to uncover is not sufficient, but it is necessary aims or utilities the logical form of its typical products.

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

6.

descriptive

science:

EXPLANATION

AND

PREDICTION

Basic sciences with sentences

are descriptive in the sense that they primarily describe, in the indicative mood, singular and general facts about true and seek to establish theories which the world. They express or types of events. A between properties lawlike (nomic) connections or probabilistic causal typical result of basic research is a deterministic law of the form (1) X causes A in situation B

or (2) By X tends to cause (with probability p) A in situation B.

its descriptive the function, basic research also provides to give scientific explanations. that event of type Assume opportunity A has occurred in a certain situation b. Then laws (1) and (2) allow us or probabilistic to construct deterministic arguments with explanatory as the explanandum: A fulfilling (3) X causes A in situation B X occurred in situation b The situation b is of type B in b. Hence, A occurred

Laws of form (1) and (2) can also be used for prediction. Suppose an event of type X has occurred in a situation b of type B. Then the occurrence of A in this situation can be predicted (certainly or with is again (3).19 argument probability p). The structure of this predictive can be used for both For example, the same laws of celestial mechanics future ones. explaining past eclipses and predicting sciences are often considered Predictive the basic type of applied science. Human cultures have been interested in successful prediction for various practical reasons. A scientific theory, which is able to pro? duce reliable predictions about future events, has predictive power. Practical astronomy, meteorology, and social statistics are examples of applied sciences which have predictive power as their central epistemic utility. In spite arguments predictive the structural and predictive similarity of explanatory theories without much (cf. (3)), there are good explanatory some useful Further, power theory of evolution). (e.g., of

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

"models" for prediction may be so simplified or idealized that they are not taken seriously as premises of explanation. and Still, explanatory - with a sciences are two subtypes of descriptive science predictive difference which is only pragmatic
7. DESIGN

in nature.

SCIENCE

to generalize the observations of Section It would be a serious mistake the 6 to the claim that the basic-applied distinction coincides with is seductive, This move since the distinction. explanatory-predictive to be the account has almost universally been accepted descriptive model of science. to formulate Some - not very successful attempts have been made alternative views, which would allow also for a special kind of "norma? tive science" or "critical science".20 But the supporters of the descrip? since they seem to tive ideal have liked to knock out these proposals, or to smuggle into inquiry moral or political valuations. openly bring Simon's is Herbert insightful book The Sci? important exception of He argues that the traditional model the Artificial (1969). of a misleading of such fields science (and science education) gives picture as engineering, architecture, medicine, business, planning, painting, and law, which are concerned with design i.e., education, economics, not how things are, but "how things ought to be in order to attain goals, An ences and to function".21 in the broad sense includes all "artificial" Let us say that design or manipulation of human activities, i.e., the production, preparation, natural systems (e.g., human body, forest) or artefacts (e.g., an aero? thus ranges from city, legal order).22 This concept of design plane, to engineering, architec? and social planning economic environmental, ture, industrial design, crafts, and the fine arts. Then research aiming at knowledge that is useful for the activity of design i.e., enhances human art and skill (Greek techne, Latin ars)23 may be called design
science.

it is the nature of design science in more detail, discussing it clearly from scientific design. (I think Simon's to distinguish important account is ambiguous here.) Scientific design is a species of design, i.e., and the activity of solving design problems by using scientific methods for Research scientific knowledge. (OR) provides methods Operations or satisfactory solutions to design problems (e.g., game finding optimal Before

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

PROFESSION
medicine man physician

PRACTICE therapy healing nursing

ART medicine

SCIENCE
medical science

art of nursing pharmacy

nursing science pharmacology

pharmacist

preparation of medical drugs farming agriculture design of mechanical works warfare

farmer

art of farming

agricultural science

engineer

engineering

engineering

science

soldier

strategy art of war

military

science

peace-making politician administrator social worker merchant tradesman teacher athlete politics politics

peace research political science

social service commerce trade teaching sporting

social policy art of trading

policy science economics

didactics athletics

didactics sport science

Table

1.

In this sense, scientific theory, decision theory, linear programming). is the result of the "scientification" of art, technology, manage? design ment, or development. On the other hand, design science is the activity of generating instru? mental knowledge for the production and manipulation of natural and artificial systems. Design science produces knowledge which may then be applied within scientific design. More to distinguish it is important generally, applied science from the applications of science. The former is a part of knowledge produc? and tion, the latter is concerned with the use of scientific knowledge methods for the solving of practical problems of action (e.g., in engin? eering or business), where a scientist may play the role of a consult.24 each can be clarified by Table 1, which separates from distinctions other a profession the related practice (e.g., a farmer), (e.g., art or skill needed in this practice farming, agriculture), (e.g., the art These

10

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

"scientification"

design science

mechanization"

Fig.

1.

and a design science aiming at improving the art (e.g., science). agricultural one and the same person may simultaneously act in a Sometimes and do research about his or her own practice: a physician profession and write a doctoral may heal patients, keep record of this activity, to make a its results. But it is nevertheless dissertation using possible between the practice of an art and the research distinction conceptual science. The fact that today sport science of the associated design of skies, the effective studies the sliding properties training of male and that the skiing female skiers, and the best skiing styles, does not mean "scientists".25 suddenly become champions of design science is given Another way of illustrating the conception Plato was well aware that some arts require more in Fig. 1. Already of farming), and exactness than others. In the dialogue Phi knowledge background he pointed out that some crafts use "numbering, meas? lebus (55d-56c), uring, and weighing" (e.g., the building of ships and houses employs and plummet), while others like straight-edge, instruments compass, or "experience are based on "guesswork" and rule of thumb, involving accorded the use of that ability to make lucky shots which is commonly it has consolidated its position by dint of the title of art or craft, when industrious practice". The latter class of arts include, Plato said, medic?
ine, navigation, warfare, and music.

arts or technologies have been based upon all human Originally skills and "rules of thumb" of the of the practical consisting expertise

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

11

or employed they have presupposed knowledge only at the level of everyday experience. Their later development has followed two and the scientification patterns which may be called the mechanization of practices or arts.26 First, human activities have become more and more effective inventions through new mechanical (e.g., tools of war? masters: which fare, agriculture, architecture, Secondly, sport). knowledge serves some art has been collected into systematic bodies of rules. This process started already in the ancient times with the arts of counting, - with care, arguing, building, and judging warfare, medical measuring, the emergence of the first guide books of arithmetic, geometry, military and law. Later the operation of strategy, medicine, logic, architecture, such rules is put in scientific tests - and a design science is created of the background through the "scientification" knowledge serving a Table 1). In this sense, the treatment of rules for geomet? practice (cf. in Euclid's Elements rical constructions is a classical exposition of design science. Pharmacology is an example of an empirical design science tests the efficacy of medical drugs. These observations give us new insight into the history of science. The standard view that all scientific disciplines have emerged from be true for some basic sciences (physics, biology, psy? philosophy may but many practical disciplines have been created chology, sociology), the scientification of professional activities.27 This process con? through tinues in our age with new disciplines - such as nursing science - which, I believe, about their identity by the conception of gain illumination science. design which
8. TECHNICAL NORMS

If a design science is expected to contribute human practices, its results should be some statements (Fig. 1). But rules, as normative are usually thought to lack truth values. How

to the scientification of kinds of rules of action in the imperative mood, could they, then, at the

same time constitute knowledge1} The solution can be found in G. H. von Wright's concept of technical is a factual statement about the relation between means norm, which and ends: (4) Both If you want the antecedent to make and a hut habitable, you ought to heat it. norm

the consequent

of such a conditional

12

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

are descriptive the former about the wants or preferences statements, of a person, the latter about the existence of a "technical ought" for him. The technical norm (4) is true if and only if heating the hut is it habitable.28 condition for making necessary a technical norm is a statement of the form More generally, (5) If you want A, and you believe then you ought to do X. that you are in a situation B,

The

normative statement, which corresponds categorical forms of (5), may have stronger or weaker quent

to the conse?

(6)

You should (ought to) do X.

It is rational It is profitable for you to do X. for you to do X.

The

conditional

quents

conse? or recommendation (5) (with alternative can be defined to be true if and only given by (6), respectively)

norm

if doing X is
(7) a necessary a sufficient probabilistic
in situation B.

cause of A cause of A cause of A

it has no truth value. If (6) is is a consequence of "practical as a premise valuation ('you of the form (6) can hardly be the case with to be the theorems of any science. However, proposed an "objective" the truth or falsity of (5) is technical norms is different: and general feature of the world, which does not presuppose any com? of (5). to the valuation in the antecedent mitment that technical norms of the type (5) express Hence, we may propose the typical structure or logical form of the knowledge by provided from sciences of Table 1 are easy to find: design science. Examples If (6) is read in the imperative mood, treated as a descriptive statement, which some its truth presupposes inference", want A'). Therefore, singular statements these symptoms, to heal a patient with If you want you use this treatment. should of fields, you should If you want to increase the productivity use these fertilizers. use this material. If your aim is to build safe aeroplanes,

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

13

If we wish risk

of war),

to increase the probability of peace (reduce a disarmament to be programme ought we should

the ac?

cepted. If we want
rates.

to avoid unemployment,

lower interest

so There are two ways in which a technical norm may be supported, to speak, from above and from below. Support "from above" means the derivation of a technical norm from statements by basic research. Bunge (1966) has provided descriptive a good example of this process: given above the temperature of iron disappears 770?C. Magnetism i If the temperature of iron exceeds 770?C, it is not magnetic. I If a magnetized is demagnetized. In order piece of iron is heated above 770?C, then it

to demagnetize

iron, heat

it above

770?C.

assume that More generally, law of the form (1) or (2), 'X factor X is not manipulable by law can be used for predictions: expect A as well. But ifX may can be converted to a technical aim A,
cause X.

and the situation

a causal basic research has established causes A in situation B\ If the cause us, but is chosen by nature, then this if we observe X in situation B, we may be chosen by us, then the causal law norm (5): if we want to achieve the is of type B, then we should bring about the

science can, in this precise science: its sense, be applied Design is derivable from the results of the descriptive basic sciences. knowledge In many cases, however, there is not available any general theory from which a technical norm can be deduced. Then technical norms are supported "from below" by building up a simplified model of the and experimental tests to situation, using trial-and-error procedures between the most important variables, and investigate the dependences of producing the desired effects. trying to find the optimal methods as a general rule, a technical norm with When the result is expressed some empirical support is obtained.

14
descriptive science

ILKKA NIINILUOTO

technology predictive science design science development scientific problem-solving

I-1-1-1
basic research applied research

Fig.

2.

9.

DESIGN

SCIENCE,

ETHICS,

POLITICS

basic sciences and predictive differ from explanatory sciences in a systematic way, because technical norms are not applied statements about the world. They don't tell us what is, was, descriptive or will be, but what ought to be so that we can attain given goals. and can, in principle, Nevertheless, they are true or false statements, in an objective be supported by theories and experiments fashion. These are summarized in a sense suggests that in Fig. 2, which conclusions is less fundamental than the descrip? the old basic - applied dichotomy distinction. tive design that the border between and It should be emphasized descriptive science splits many scientific disciplines.30 Let S be some activity design - or which can be studied by science, e.g., S might be farming, nursing Design sciences science itself which is the object of "science studies".31 Then descriptive of 5, the research of S includes at least the history of S, the psychology of S. Basic research about S tries to sociology of S, and the economics some systematic the present state of S and to establish describe regu? - in this we may larities about S way, speak about basic research and life sciences, medicide, social sciences, sciences, the practical kernel, science contains only a part Design jurisprudence. so to speak - of these discipines. we have found that the border between In one sense, however, and design science may depend on the pragmatic question predictive and of causal factors. Astronomy the human manipulability about can? are today predictive since their regularities sciences, meteorology to useful technical norms - the rule 'If you want not be transformed in an eclipse, is irrelevant the Sun and Earth' between place moon to human possibilities. But scientists are already speculating relation the causal factor X in a law about making planets habitable. Whether within technical

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF APPLIED

RESEARCH

15

in B' is manipulable by us depends human technology. by This conclusion already suggests that, unlike science has to satisfy a special condition of social norm (5), where X can be brought about by us, purposes only upon two further conditions: (i) ations that are (excatly or at least approximately)

'X causes A

on the stage

reached

basic research, design relevance. A technical is useful for practical there are in fact situ?

of type B, and (ii) the goal A should be at least potentially for some social acceptable or "auditory". group As technical norms contain evaluative and normative terms, design science seems to radically differ from the "positivistic" ideal of "value a technical norm does neutral" science. But as a conditional statement,

not require a commitment to the value premise of its antecedent. For a militarist and a pacifist may both agree on the truth of the example, of military conditional recommendations studies, even if they sharply about their relevance. A technical norm is binding only for disagree value premise.32 accept their conditional in this the same time, in spite of value-neutrality to applied science ismorally responsible for contributing nical norms) he or she has created. How is the value A in a technical norm chosen? some design the answer is straightforward: sciences, At those who sense, a person the tools (tech? In the case of

medicine aims at promoting at maximizing health, business economics profits, peace research tries to reduce the risk of military conflicts, and social policy studies promote the welfare of society. Aims of this kind are so tightly fixed with the professional of these sciences goals and the self-identity as if forgetting that they often present their conclusions categorically, the overall value commitment. the content and desirability of Still, these aims may be put into question within philosophy and ethics: the philosophy of medicine discusses the definition social of health, the "health" of society, business ethics and environmental philosophy ethics the legitimate goals of human actions towards other agents or
nature.

as medicine For example, takes it for granted that a patient must be technical norms of the form 'If you want to heal a person healed, with symptoms B, use treatment X" may be expressed simply by 'Use treatment X for patients with symptoms B\ Such a move becomes if it is denied a that the "symptoms" B constitute only problematic "disease" (e.g., drug use, mental abnormality).

16

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

In many debate. cases, the choice of A involves a political Policy can be ana? the experts differ in their recommendations, issues, where If two lyzed into their elements by the concept of technical norm. 'Do XXV and 'Do X2\\ groups of experts advocate conflicting policies their disagreement may be due to at least three separate respectively,
reasons:

(a) (b) (c)

the relevant goals Ax or A2 about the current situation Bx or B2 about the underlying causal mechanism disagreement tween X& B and A.33 disagreement disagreement about

be?

in principle solvable by empirical (b) and (c) are factual disputes, about poli? about valuations. Disputes research, but (a) is a difference cies concerning and society often contain both energy, environment, - and the latter tend to be concealed factual and evaluative assumptions under the guise of "neutral" experts.34 There is one further, rather subtle way in which a technical norm a distinction In making the manipul? between may involve valuations. ate factors X and the unchanging situation B, we in fact bring in an an economic that B must be kept constant.35 For example, assumption in a capitalist recommendation country may (resp. socialist) policy that the economic system itself must not be interfered with. presuppose a technical norm should to eliminate such hidden valuations, Therefore, Here so that the goal A includes all the relevant value assump? be formulated to preserve the mar? tions (e.g., A=to improve gross national product, ket economy, and to avoid such and such side effects).
10. CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS

As

a technical norm it is not true that "the aim justifies the means", that should include among its antecedent A all the relevant valuations ac? of the recommended concern the direct and indirect consequences and has not always been respected, this requirement tion X. That science has been utilized with a very narrow scope and distorted applied effi? content of human valuations (usually only technical and economic in the short run), has led to a justified criticism of the dangers ciency
"instrumental reason".36

of

science does not imply crisis" of modern the "legitimation However, or to invent a new type of the need to reject the idea of basic science

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

17

science, with aims and standards differing from other forms of inquiry.37 The concept of design science covers in fact a whole variety of different They include cases of blind technocratic approach (where possibilities. the goal A, without it or the scientist accepts uncritically questioning his or her moral without in producing understanding responsibility social engineering tools for reaching A), piecemeal (where the goal A small reforms to the social system), and emancipatory proposes only research (where the goal A is critical of the status quo and proposes radical, even Utopian changes in the prevailing order). The last point illustrates the fact that, in a social design science, the goal A need not be a demand imposed "from above" by a bureaucratic it may express the "we Instead, planning officer over the citizens. a democratic intention" of The concept of design science community. thus covers also the so-called participatory planning or action research, to live with his or her "clients" and helps the researcher where goes It also thereby shows that the "in them elicit their own preferences. theories (i.e., the alleged crementalist" criticism of planning impossi? reason for is not a sufficient subject and object) bility of separating rejecting the idea of instrumental rationality.38 the concept technical norm shows how But, on the other hand, science may be. For many difficult applied extremely systems (e.g., itmay be very hard to find any approximately economy, technosystem) true and lawlike regularities. For some systems involving both material and human elements (e.g., a city), it may be an immensely complex affair to give a correct and sufficiently detailed description of its present state. And for many situations it may (e.g., animals, human patients) are legitimate he highly controversial what goals and means from a moral point of view. Is the attempt to establish design sciences, in spite of all these diffi? still a worthwhile think so today, culties, enterprise? Many professions with hope that the making of their practice and education obviously "scientific" would given them a higher status in society. The ments to design science seems to come from the argu? real challenge of Hubert L. Dreyfus, whose criticism of artificial intelligence and expert systems is directly applicable to know-how by represented technical norms. Dreyfus that skill based upon rules belongs argues and "advanced beginners", while the true "expert" only to "novices" acts by "intuitive on action-guiding without reliance intelligence"
rules.39

18

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

The important issue, which remains to be settled in further philosoph? ical and empirical work, is to analyse and to classify human skills into those which can, or cannot, be improved by their "scientification".

NOTES 1 account is due to Herbert Simon In my view, the most (1969) (cf. Section interesting 7 below). Useful discussions have been presented (see Gasparski by Polish praxeologists et al., 1983) and analytical of technology issue (see Rapp, 1974). A special philosophers on applied in Synthese 81:3 (1989). The work on the Finalization science was published to me inconclusive Thesis 1984a, Ch. (cf. Niiniluoto, 1983) seems 10). My (cf. Sch?fer, own ideas about applied since 1983. See Niiniluoto science have been developed (1984a),

Chs. 10-12, (1984b), (1985b), and the Finnish papers (1985a) and (1987b). 2 3
4 For Bernai, nice see Niiniluoto is due (1990a).

See Ackoff (1962) and the criticism inNiiniluoto (1984a), Ch. 11.
This term basic research to Elzinga (1985). that Irvine and Martin

An of this drift is the distinction example between pure curiosity-oriented (1984) make the knowledge base for tomor? the latter provides and strategic research research, where does not appreciate the fact that curiosity-oriented row's technologies. This terminology to the cognitive relative basic research is also "strategic" goals of inquiry. 5 is Latour with many A recent example who operates (1987), surprisingly sharp between science and technology. but finds no difference Janus-faced dichotomies, 6 Cf. Sintonen (1990). 7 of Basic to my queries Commission about the basic-applied After distinction, listening to include in Finland in 1989) decided of Education Research by the Ministry (appointed within within volume "basic research" all publicly funded research (about 40 percent of the R&D in Finland).

8 See Levi (1967), Niiniluoto (1987a). 9 See Popper (1963), Niiniluoto (1984a). 10
Some realists would take explanation

to be more

fundamental

notion

than

truth. Cf.

Leplin (1984) and Tuomela (1985). 11

norms of the Mertonian of the criticism See, e.g., Mulkay's against (1979) summary science. 12 see von Wright For norms, (1963, 1983). 13 on drug use in Restivo and of research the interesting for example, See, example

Loughlin (1987). 14 Cf. Skolimowski (1966), Rapp

(1984a),

(1974), Mitcham and Mackey

(1983), Niiniluoto

15
16 17 18

Ch.

12. p. 262. and Niiniluoto on the symmetry

See Rescher (1990) and Niiniluoto (1992).

See Niiniluoto (1984a), (1971) (1989). (1969) between explanation and prediction. (1984a), p. 221.

Cf. Habermas

See Longino 19 Cf. Stegm?ller

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

19

20 Cf. Habermas that a science about the norms valid in (1971) and Held (1980). Note a given society See Niiniluoto may be descriptive. (e.g., legal dogmatics) (1985b). 21 on "design" See Simon sense of industrial in the narrower (1982), p. 7. For comments see Niiniluoto design, (1984b). 22 see Bunge For such a broad concept of design, I don't assume with (1979). However, that technology is based upon science. Bunge always 23 For the concepts of techne and ars, see Mitcham (1979). 24 This distinction is denied by the view L. J. Savage called a scientific criticism 25 But it might Soeul (1988), is always a decision to act as see Levi of behaviouralism, (1967). hypothesis be mentioned Tapio Korjus, that wrote

"behaviouralism": were

if the hypothesis

to accept true. For a

the gold medalist of javelin at the Olympic Games in his Master's in physical Thesis education about javelin

throwing. 26 Cf. Niiniluoto (1984b). 27 I am not theoretical

28
29

that such practical became sciences before suggesting disciplines in Greece: the scientification science of a practice presupposes has already been invented. (as a method)

the birth that

of

science

See vonWright (1963, 1988).

complication such as with the weaker and 'rational'

in (6) arises conclusions from the problem that can be defined formal 'profitable' by several different of (6) and (7) could be given in (Bayesian) decision Sharper formulations theory, a technical norm is generalized where to a statement of the form 'If your value system is V, your belief is B, and your favourite is C, then you ought decision criterion system concepts criteria. own experience is that some scientists fear that the idea of design is too science or technocratic tied with instrumental I am not by any means values. rationality that disciplines or nursing such as future studies, science are suggesting library science, to design reduced since these activities should also be investigated science, entirely by etc. philosophy, history, psychology, sociology, 31 The design science to scientific research of "science" corresponding (as a subsystem as a whole) is nothing else than "methodology". Laudan that (1987) has suggested norms are "hypothetical in science methodological imperatives" (i.e., technical norms). Another to science science related is science policy studies. design 32 Cf. Niiniluoto of this observation to auditory-relative (1985b) for the relevance concep? My much tions of truth. 33 A fourth factor is the choice of the criterion of rationality (e.g., Bayes-rule, minimax). 30

to do X\

For the suggestion that the so-called are really technical "technological imperatives" see Niiniluoto norms, with a hidden value antecedent, (1990b). 35 A remark to this effect has been made, in the context of ecological theories, by Dr. Yrj? Haila.

See Levi (1980), Appendix. 34

36
37

See Held (1980) and vonWright (1986).

(1987) on the new standards of "validity" in the

and Loughlin See, e.g., Restivo movements. for the people" "science 38 Cf. Lindblom and Cohen (1979). 39 See Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1986).

20

ILKKA

NIINILUOTO

REFERENCES of S. K. Gupta and J. S. Minas): R. L. (with collaboration 1962, Scientific Ackoff, New York. Research John Wiley, Method: Decisions, Applied Optimizing D. B. (eds.): and Philosophy G. and Doner, 1979, The History of Technol? Bugliarello, of Illinois Press, Urbana. ogy, University Bunge, Bunge, Dreyfus, M.: M.: 1966, 1979, 'Technology as Applied Science', Technology and Culture in Bugliarello 7, 329-349. and Doner

(Reprinted inRapp (1974), pp. 19-36.)

'The Philosophical Richness of Technology', (1979), pp. 262-281. H. L. and S. E.:

over Machine: The Power and Intuition 1986, Mind of Human Oxford. in the Era of the Computer, Blackwell, Expertise in B. and the Drift of Epistemic A.: Criteria', 'Research, 1985, Bureaucracy Elzinga, Research & Wiksell, Wittrock and A. Elzinga System, Almqvist (eds.), The University Stockholm.

of Design Year? N. et al.: 1983, 'Contemporary Science', Praxeology History Gasparski, book 3, 147-156. J.: 1971, Knowledge and Human Interest, Beacon Press, Boston. Habermas, to Critical Theory, University of California Press, Berkeley. Held, D.: 1980, Introduction in Science: Picking the Winners, Francis Pinter, B.: 1984, Foresight Irvine, I. and Martin, London. Latour, Laudan, 31. Leplin, Levi, Levi, B.: L.: 1987, 1987, Science in Action, Press, Milton Open University or Rationality', American Philosophical Keynes. Quarterly 24, 19

'Progress

of California J. (ed.): 1984, Scientific Realism, Press, Berkeley. University New York. A. Knopf, With Truth, Alfred I.: 1967, Gambling (2nd ed. The MIT Mass. Press, Cambridge, 1973.) I.: 1980, The Enterprise C. E. and Cohen, H. of Knowledge, D. K.: 1979, The MIT Usable Press, Knowledge: Haven. Mass. Cambridge, and Social Social Science Dose-Re? and Doner

Yale University Press, New Solving, Effects of Low-Level Radiation: E.: Values, 1989, 'Biological Risk Estimates', 81, 391-404. Synthese sponse Models, in Bugliarello of Technology', and the History C: 1979, 'Philosophy Mitcham, Longino,

Lindblom, Problem

(1979), pp. 163-201.

Mitcham, York. Mulkay, C. and Mackey, R. (eds.): 1983, Philosophy and Technology, Macmillan, New

Niiniluoto,

London. Allen & Unwin, and the Sociology 1979, Science of Knowledge, Dordrecht. D. Reidel, I.: 1984a, Is Science Progressive!, on Design', in S. Vihma I.: 1984b, (ed.), De? Niiniluoto, Perspectives 'Philosophical of Industrial Arts, Helsinki, Research, pp. 13-31. University Design signforschung, M.: Niiniluoto, Tieteen 169-192. in tieteiss?', soveltavissa I.: 1985a, 'Edistyminen Suomen Akatemian tieteen edistyminen, historia ja I.: 1985b, 'Truth in E. Kaukonen julkaisuja et al. (eds.), pp. Con? 2, Helsinki, et al. Beiheft

Niiniluoto, ditions Steiner

of Validity Verlag,

and Cognition

Wiesbaden,

in N. MacCormick and Legal Norms', inModern ARSP, Legal Thought, pp. 168-190.

(eds.),

25, Franz

THE

AIM

AND

STRUCTURE

OF

APPLIED

RESEARCH

21

L: 1987a, Truthlikeness, D. Reidel, Dordrecht. Niiniluoto, L: 1987b, 'Soveltavat tieteet tieteenfilosofian Niiniluoto, n?k?kulmasta', Scientiarum Fennica Year Book 1986-1987, Helsinki, pp. 137-142. I.: 1990a, 'Science and Epistemic Science Studies 3:1 Niiniluoto, Values',

in Academia

(1990), 21-25. I.: 1990b, Stud? 'Should Technological be Obeyed?', International Niiniluoto, Imperatives ies in the Philosophy 4:2, 181-189. of Science I.: 1992, 'Descriptive and Inductive the Proceedings Niiniluoto, Simplicity', forthcoming of the Carnap-Reichenbach 1991. Konstanz, May Symposium, K.: 1963, Conjectures and Refutations, and Kegan Paul, Popper, Routledge to a Philosophy D. Reidel, of Technology, Rapp, F. (ed.): 1974, Contributions inNatural N. (ed.): 1990, Aesthetic Factors Press Rescher, Science, University Lanham. S. and Loughlin, J.: 1987, Restivo, in Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Sch?fer, W. (ed.): 1983, Finalization 'Critical of Science and Scientific Sociology vol. 8:3, pp. 486-508. D. Reidel, Dordrecht. London. Dordrecht. of America,

Validity',

Utilization, in Science,

The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. Simon, H.: 1969, The Sciences of the Artifcial, (2nd ed. 1982.) Sciences-Can the Distinction 1990, 'Basic and Applied Sintonen, M.: (Still) Be Drawn?', Science Studies 3:2 (1990), 23-31. H.: 'The Structure of Thinking in Technology', Skolimowski, 1966, in Rapp Culture 7, 371-383. (Reprinted (1974), pp. 72-85.) W.: und Begr?ndung, 1969, Wissenschaftliche Stegm?ller, Erkl?rung Berlin. R.: 1985, Tuomela, von Wright, G. H.: von Wright, von Wright, Manuscript Department University Unioninkatu Finland G. H.: G. H.: submitted and Reality, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, Science, Action, and Action, and Kegan 1963, Norm Paul, Routledge Oxford, 1983, Practical Reason, Blackwell, 1986, Vetenskapen September 24, och f?rnuftet, 1991 S?derstr?m, Borg?. Technology Springer-Verlag, and

London,

of Philosophy of Helsinki 40 B

00170 Helsinki