Chan wa Kun

This paper explores the pursuitworthiness of experiments in neurolinguistics by investigating whether criteria for pursuitworthiness can be established for experiments in this field and, if so, which factors are most relevant. Drawing on a detailed analysis of research practices and case studies in neurolinguistics, we propose that pursuitworthiness in this domain should be evaluated along two dimensions: methodological and pragmatic. These dimensions, while both essential, stand in an asymmetrical relationship: methodological criteria primarily serve as non-negotiable thresholds for epistemic adequacy, filtering the space of viable experiments, whereas pragmatic criteria, although context-sensitive, play a role in guiding comparative prioritization within that viable space. Additionally, we critically assess Jamie Shaw’s distinction between luxury and urgent science by exploring its utility in mapping the interplay between methodological and pragmatic criteria. We contend that, while the distinction offers valuable theoretical insights, its applicability to neurolinguistics is limited, mainly due to difficulties in predicting which experiments will yield the most impactful outcomes. Ultimately, our analysis demonstrates the value of adopting a structured yet context-sensitive approach to experimental pursuitworthiness in neurolinguistics, grounded in the interplay of methodological integrity and pragmatic viability.