Axiological neutrality

neutralité axiologique

Worked through in 1 video · 3 passages.

What Dominique Pagani says

Dominique Pagani approaches axiological neutrality from two angles. On the one hand, he applies it to technical means: a means is neutral with regard to values; one does not condemn the knife but the person who stabs with it, since good and evil belong to man alone1. Means never make a morality, and one must not put the means on trial2. The more powerful a means, the more it makes both good and evil possible: with the atom, one cures cancers or razes Nagasaki3. On the other hand, regarding the sciences of history, he considers this neutrality legitimate in the strictly scientific part of the work, but illusory as soon as one uses natural language: saying "the sun rises" already gives value to what is high4. Finally, he points to a disquieting neutrality, concerned only with what governs things, with no regard for values5.

Summary produced automatically from 5 of the passages below, to be reviewed; the numbers link to the moment in the session.

Season 9.2 · 14 Jan 20219 #12 How can sciences of history be real?

11:35It cannot be proclaimed as soon as one leaves equations behind: to say "the sun is rising" already belongs to desire, not to knowledge.
18:17Understanding is by essence neutral with regard to values: its criteria are the true and the false, not the good or the beautiful.
46:58This neutrality is disturbing when it concerns itself only with what governs things, without regard for values.