As I understand these words “ambition” and “humility” are not opposed to one another. The revolution that science brought (and still brings) is a) the humility that we don’t know how the world works and b) the ambition, and a method, to find out. Science progresses by creating hypotheses and then discarding and revising those hypotheses when something comes along that doesn’t quite fit. Science has to stay humble but it doesn’t shrug its shoulders and say that since it can only offer hypotheses, all hypotheses are equally valid. It is willing to say that a hypothesis was wrong (or incomplete) and keep seeking. Applying this to the social sciences and humanities is tricky. But that’s the challenge.
As I understand these words “ambition” and “humility” are not opposed to one another. The revolution that science brought (and still brings) is a) the humility that we don’t know how the world works and b) the ambition, and a method, to find out. Science progresses by creating hypotheses and then discarding and revising those hypotheses when something comes along that doesn’t quite fit. Science has to stay humble but it doesn’t shrug its shoulders and say that since it can only offer hypotheses, all hypotheses are equally valid. It is willing to say that a hypothesis was wrong (or incomplete) and keep seeking. Applying this to the social sciences and humanities is tricky. But that’s the challenge.
Very interesting observations about intellectual ambition. Thanks