How far should science be guided by ethics
How far should science be guided by ethics?
Look around you and see for yourself the mighty work of technology. The computer, an invention we consider to be man’s greatest achievements yet, at one corner of the room now makes the rapid spread of mass information possible. These were all impossible in the past! Who would ever think that invisible waves could be the key for the transmission of electronic messages? Now, take a look at these objects again. The microchip in the computer, the heart of the man’s greatest triumph, is actually a two headed Janus. Guided missiles and cancer treatment all attribute to this amoral object. If so, science should not be allowed to roam freely as it is. It should be guided by man’s moral intellect, ethics as we might say to minimise the chances of science being abused for man’s folly.
Science can be considered an amoral field of study and that perhaps, is the most logical premise to support the guidance provided by ethics. Science is a tool. It has no feelings, regards for the moral context of a situation and it can be used for god and bad. It is only concerned with the knowledge and understanding of the world around us, obtained through the scientific method. To illustrate this point, put some thought into this analogy. Science can teach us to cure and treat a rapist with a sexually transmitted infection, but it does not instruct us whether or not to save him. In such a case, it would be foolish not to put ethics side-by-side with science at all for science does not pre-dictate how it should be used but simply gives us this knowledge. Without ethics, it would be baffling task on what to do with science in the first place since science cannot give us the answer. Science always sits on the fence and it is left to humans to decide what to do with it. To say that science can survive on its own without ethics is to hence deny the use of science at all.
Another reason to consider is that ethics can lead us away from
Look around you and see for yourself the mighty work of technology. The computer, an invention we consider to be man’s greatest achievements yet, at one corner of the room now makes the rapid spread of mass information possible. These were all impossible in the past! Who would ever think that invisible waves could be the key for the transmission of electronic messages? Now, take a look at these objects again. The microchip in the computer, the heart of the man’s greatest triumph, is actually a two headed Janus. Guided missiles and cancer treatment all attribute to this amoral object. If so, science should not be allowed to roam freely as it is. It should be guided by man’s moral intellect, ethics as we might say to minimise the chances of science being abused for man’s folly.
Science can be considered an amoral field of study and that perhaps, is the most logical premise to support the guidance provided by ethics. Science is a tool. It has no feelings, regards for the moral context of a situation and it can be used for god and bad. It is only concerned with the knowledge and understanding of the world around us, obtained through the scientific method. To illustrate this point, put some thought into this analogy. Science can teach us to cure and treat a rapist with a sexually transmitted infection, but it does not instruct us whether or not to save him. In such a case, it would be foolish not to put ethics side-by-side with science at all for science does not pre-dictate how it should be used but simply gives us this knowledge. Without ethics, it would be baffling task on what to do with science in the first place since science cannot give us the answer. Science always sits on the fence and it is left to humans to decide what to do with it. To say that science can survive on its own without ethics is to hence deny the use of science at all.
Another reason to consider is that ethics can lead us away from