it 
PREFACE 
body confuses the problem regarding the ultimate reality 
of matter with the problem regarding the relative tensile 
strength of steel and iron. The different natural sciences 
which supply the knowledge to be applied to the practical 
problem are all based on a common method, the scientific 
method, and that is why their results can be co-ordinated. 
Within each field of inquiry there is a far-going specializa- 
tion and division of labor, but because all results are ob- 
tained by a common method, they naturally integrate in a 
homogeneous body of knowledge. 
With regard to man’s control over his social environ- 
ment, on the other hand, the situation is one of utter con- 
fusion. There is a confusion between means and ends, be- 
tween practical problems and problems of theoretic in- 
quiry. There is in the social sciences no common agree- 
ment as to method and no distinction between scientific 
and philosophic inquiry. There is very little specializa- 
tion within each field; and a lack of uniformity in method, 
making co-ordination impossible, reduces its value to zero. 
With regard to social problems, there is a constant con- 
fusion between means and ends. All the solutions sug- 
gested imply a value judgment of what society ought to be. 
The problem whether the society which is thus to be im- 
proved actually desires the results which would follow from 
the change advocated is never considered separately. The 
problem regarding the result to be obtained is never kept 
clear and distinct from the problem regarding the ways to 
obtain that result. 
The problem regarding the means is a problem of ap- 
plied science. It involves the integration and co-ordina- 
tion of the knowledge made available by a great many dif- 
ferent social sciences. But in the world of social phenome- 
na, engineering problems are confused with problems of 
theoretic inquiry. They are dealt with as if they were prob-