Page 15 - Contribution To Phenomenology

8 LESTER EMBREE

is currently being called human science is not science sensu strictu, i.e.,
is not theoretical, although it may be "applied science/' a notion not
without difficulties. Secondly, there is reason to doubt that the extension
should be confined to the human, prominent as the cultural practices of
Homo sapiens sapien may be within the class designated. These reasons
need elaboration.
For anyone who views science strictly speaking as theoretical, "nursing
as a human science" or even "psychology as a human science," where
"psychology" chiefly designates counseling and psychotherapy, are
misleading expressions. They may be defended by recourse to the
distinction between pure and applied science and the suggestion that
expressions of the form "X as a human science" might better be
expressed as "human-scientific X," the latter formulation not claiming that
X is a science but only that it is science-based. Both of these moves
raise significant points about how theory relates to practice. For example,
it could be a mistake to believe that there is a theoretical discipline that
is simply applied, because most if not all science-based practices are
based not upon one but upon a variety of theoretical disciplines. It would
be another mistake to believe that, temporally speaking, the theoretical
sciences came first and then practical efforts were developed, which does
sometimes happen currently. In most cases, however, there are ancient
practices, such as agriculture, to which science has only been applied
relatively recently. Then again, it needs to be recognized that no practice
is entirely science-based because, on the one hand, it also includes skill
acquired through experience, coaching, apprenticeship, etc., i.e., amateur
and crafty skill and, on the other hand, there is the crucial question of
the values and valuing that move and perhaps even justify the charac-
teristic actions of the profession in question.*
As for other expressions, "humane disciplines" may have even more
of a moralistic connotation than "moral sciences." "Humanistic disciplines"
is better in this respect, but the first word in that expression seems too
narrow insofar as sociology, for example, is seldom considered one of the
so-called humanities. (Some deep thinkers play with "human science" not

* When practice-specific equipment is involved, it is appropriate to speak of
"technology," but when psychotherapy, for example, can be performed while jogging
in the park, as allegedly happens in California, or the equipment relied upon by
nurses is not different from that used by doctors, so that the specific difference
lies in the practice rather than the equipment, then that expression seems inap-
propriate.