Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The principle of value neutrality is a methodological requirement, first of all, in the humanities and social sciences, according to which a researcher or teacher should strive for the most non-evaluative description of the phenomena under study. The same requirement applies to the language used by the researcher: it must be such that it describes, not evaluates. In its classical form, the idea of value neutrality was formulated by Max Weber in the lecture “Science as a vocation and profession”.
However, since we are all human beings and we are all directly interested in what is happening to society, it is usually impossible to achieve absolute value neutrality in the study of society. Therefore, the requirement of value neutrality is more relevant to the desire to maintain objectivity as much as possible. This aspiration, according to the proponents of this position, distinguishes deliberately biased works that set ideological, apologetic, proselytizing and other extra-scientific goals from the actual scientific works.
The principle demands non-bias and ideological impartiality. In science/theory, there is no alternative to it. But in practice, its manifestations are not found. An example? There is an opinion about the value neutrality of technocrats. So it's a lie. Any management decision is evaluated based on the preferences of the manager who makes it.