The Metaphysical Foundation of Buddhism and Modern Science

5
systematic thought has made progress apart from some adequately
general working hypothesis, adapted to its special topic. Such an
hypothesis directs observation, and decides upon the mutual relevance of
various types of evidence. In short, it prescribes method. To venture
upon productive thought without such an explicit theory is to abandon
oneself to the doctrines derived one's grandfather.
In the preliminary stages of knowledge a haphazard criterion is all that is
possible. Progress is then very slow, and most of the effort is wasted.
Even an inadequate working hypothesis with some conformation to fact is
better than nothing. It coordinates procedure.
The advance of any reasonably developed science is twofold. There is the
advance of detailed knowledge within the method prescribed by the
reigning working hypothesis; and there is the rectification of the working
hypothesis dictated by the inadequacies of the current orthodoxy.
Sometimes it is necessary for a science to entertain concurrently two –
or more – working hypotheses, each with its own success and its own
failure. Such hypotheses are contradictory as stated; and science awaits
their conciliation by the production of a working hypothesis with a wider
sweep. When a new working hypothesis is proposed, it must be criticized
from its own point of view. For example, it is futile to object to the
5