There follows a paraphrase of a brief passage written by Lonergan in [Dunne and Laporte, 1978, pp. 76-78]
… divers men can ask themselves whether or not they are genuine …scientists of explanatory macroeconomics. They may answer that they are, and their answers may be correct. But it can also happen that they answer affirmatively and none the less are mistaken. In that case there will be a series of points in which what they are coincides with what the ideals of the tradition demand. But there wil also be another series marked by a greater or less divergence. These points of divergence tend to be overlooked. Whether from a selective inattention, or a failure to understand, or an undetected rationalization, the divergence exists. What I am is one thing, what a genuine scientist is is another, and I am unaware of the difference. My unawareness is unexpressed. Indeed, I have no language to express what I really am, so I use the language of the tradition I unauthentically appropriate, and thereby I devaluate, distort, water down, corrupt that language. Continue reading