Abstract
Philosophers of science tend to adjudicate debates about the value-free ideal by appealing to case-studies of value-laden science. Interpreting case-studies, however, faces a methodological challenge: measuring the causal impact of values where values interact with myriad causal factors. This challenge can be met, but not easily. Insofar as it is unmet, philosophers would do well to attend to other research questions. I propose we model values in science as goals as opposed to decision vectors. Rather than investigate proper reasons for scientific choices, we might focus on investigating proper goals of scientific inquiry.
