When the terms ‘control’ and ‘experiment’ are used in reference to the methodological procedures of the social sciences, frequently the question is raised as to whether or not the investigator uses the terms in the same sense as the natural scientist. The purpose of this paper is to show that the social scientist has good reason to use them in the same sense and that in fact this usage is consistent with a long tradition of social research. This will be (...) shown by an investigation of some common assumptions in the social sciences, such as, the claim that the social sciences are younger than the natural sciences and that the former have depended upon the latter for methodological cues, that human behavior is ultimately inexplicable and unpredictable, and that the social scientist is unable to observe human behavior under controlled, experimental conditions except in trivial instances. Of course, not all social scientists make these assumptions but they occur in the literature and their significance is considerable when the scientific status of the social sciences is being discussed. (shrink)