Search

This article presents a response by George Geiger to several commentaries about his paper on values and social sciences. Geiger, particularly, presented his objections to Herbert Feigl's discussion of valuation. According to Geiger, the quotations from Feigl's article seem to institutionalize a kind of word-magic in which certain counters have an implicit mystery, counters like "ought," "imperative," "prescription," and the like. Meanwhile, there is an unquestionable justification for Feigl's distinction between "studying" and "making" evaluations. It is the obvious justification of division of labor and of handling first things first. And there is vital heuristic and preparatory work in any kind of analysis, necessary if not sufficient.