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 specialization
 and division of labor, but because all results are obtained
 by a common method, they naturally integrate in a
homogeneous body of knowledge.
With regard to man’s control over his social environment,
 on the other hand, the situation is one of utter confusion.
 There is a confusion between means and ends, between
 practical problems and problems of theoretic inquiry.
 There is in the social sciences no common agreement
 as to method and no distinction between scientific
and philosophic inquiry. There is very little specialization
 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 confusion
 between means and ends. All the solutions suggested
 imply a value judgment of what society ought to be.
The problem whether the society which is thus to be improved
 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 applied
 science. It involves the integration and co-ordination
 of the knowledge made available by a great many different
 social sciences. But in the world of social phenomena,
 engineering problems are confused with problems of
theoretic inquiry. They are dealt with as if they were prob-