Scientists are not personally outside of morality, but no moral precept can
establish in advance what the outcome of a process of scientific enquiry
should be or is going to be.
Science was under the regime of what is good for us when the people who got
to decide what is good for us were the authorities of the catholic church
and scientists the outcomes of whose investigations were not in conformance
with church doctrine were imprisoned and tortured until they recanted.
I don't see why it's inevitable that scientific outcomes should be social
outcomes. The fact that most scientists are human beings has no necessary
bearing on the results that will be returned by their investigations.
Dominic
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Upton" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: A Responsibility to Awe
> ok
>
> but the other side of that is the scientist who says _oh you don't
> understand what science is_ to put themselves outside of morality
>
> scientific outcomes are inevitably social outcomes, unless you conduct
> science on a remote planet where you are only visited by Kirk and Spock
>
> and I am not sure *why I have said ok to start with
>
> when ever *was science _under the regime of what is good for us_
>
> what regime is that?
>
> it must have been while I was napping
>
> L
|