Understanding As A Valid Form Of Knowing [02.15.98]

‘A powerful movement of critical thought has been at work to eliminate any quest for an understanding that carries with it the metaphysical implications of a groping for reality behind a screen of appearances. Natural science has been taught to regard itself as a mere description of experience: a description which can be said to explain the facts of nature only in so far as it represents individual events as instances of general features. ... Modern science disclaims any intention of understanding the hidden nature of things; its philosophy condemns any such endeavour as vague, misleading and altogether unscientific.

But I refuse to heed this warning. I agree that the process of understanding leads beyond - indeed far beyond - what a strict empiricism regards as the domain of legitimate knowledge; but I reject such an empiricism. If consistently applied, it would discredit any knowledge whatever and it can be upheld only by allowing it to remain inconsistent. It is permitted this inconsistency because its ruthless mutilation of human experience lends it such a high reputation for scientific severity, that its prestige overrides the defensiveness of its own foundations. Our acknowledgement of understanding as a valid form of knowing will go a long way towards liberating our minds from this violent and inefficient despotism.’

Michael Polanyi [1959]. The Study of Man. The University of Chicago Press: Chicago & London. ISBN 0-226-67291-3 [p. 20/1].