854
PARTISAN REVIEW
thing but praise the prevailing modesty and clarity with which the
results of the research are written up. There can be no question either
that the problems and methods embraced under the "social science"
rubric include much of very great importance to the study of human
behavior, and that these studies should be prosecuted.
But to say this is not to satisfy the social relations hucksters. Indeed,
the more basic questions are raised, not by the relatively innocuous prac–
tice of "social science," but by its mystique-its pretensions to new
knowledge and to new certitude, its pretensions ultimately to a body
of knowledge with the same properties of verifiability and predictability
as modern physical theory. Turning to
The American Soldier,
one can
legitimately ask: ( 1) does this kind of research yield anything new?
and (2) does what it does yield constitute a higher and more certain
form of knowledge?
The answer to the first question is easy. Most of
The American
Soldier
is a ponderous demonstration in Newspeak of such facts as these :
new recruits do not like noncoms; front-line troops resent rear echelon
troops; combat men manifest a high level of anxiety as compared to
other soldiers; married privates are more likely than single privates to
worry about their families back home. Indeed, one can find little in the
1200 pages of text and the innumerable surveys which is not described
more vividly and compactly, and with far greater psychological insight, in
a small book entitled
Up Front
by Bill Mauldin. What Mauldin may
have missed will turn up in the pages of Ernie Pyle.
The authors of
The American Soldier
show a sporadic and appre–
hensive recognition of their lack of originality. One contributor writes
defensively that perhaps Conrad could communicate the "feel" of a hur–
ricane better, but that meteorology has its uses too. A more aggressive
contributor, describing writers in his barbarous patois as "insightful
observers," comments that their "recorded observations and insights are,
however, fragmentary, relatively unsystematic, and nonquantitative.
What can therefore be added is further systematization, based upon a
quantitative treatment of many soldiers' responses."
"Social science," thus, does not discover; it systematizes through
quantification and thereby places knowledge on a truly "scientific" basis.
Such an undertaking involves a technique; and the technique you must
believe in to accept
The American Soldier,
is polling. Recent criticism
by such persons as Lindsay Rogers and Harry S. Truman has shaken our
faith in the infallibility of the pollsters. Indeed, given a conflict be–
tween a poll and an "insightful observer," even the authors of
The
American Soldier
generally (see, e. g., volume II, page 29) reinterpret
