Does science make us better people?

  • Thread starter Thread starter glo
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 40
  • Views Views 6K
glo

glo

IB Legend
Messages
8,472
Reaction score
1,785
Gender
Female
Religion
Christianity
I have to start by admitting that I am not a particularly scientifically minded person.
That is not to say that I don't appreciate the benefits of many scientific advances - I just don't have a great interest in science on the whole ...
My husband, on the other hand, loves all things scientific!

Now, we were watching a Horizon programme on the concept on time. By the time the programme was explaining the umteenth dimension and parallel universes my eyes were glazing over, and all I could hear was yadda-yadda-yadda ... whereas my husband was on the edge of his seat with interest ...!
(Well, I exaggerate slightly for emphasis - but you get the idea ... :D)

In the end - in my frustration - I said "None of this scientific knowledge makes us better people!"
(For the sake of this thread I define 'better' as 'more humane' and 'of greater moral understanding', meaning attributes such as kindness, compassion, love, care for each other etc, etc.)

I guess behind that statement of mine lies my personal belief that advancing such humane attributes (let's call them moral values) is of greater importance than advancing in scientific knowledge.
Or - at the very least - that growth of scientific knowledge needs to be balanced by an equal growth in moral understanding.

This leaves me with two questions for this thread:
  1. Can scientific knowledge help us become 'better human beings'?
    and
  2. Is it true that moral growth is more important than growing in scientific knowledge?

Looking forward to a peaceful discussion,
 
I dunno. I guess Scientific understanding has its advantages and the many advances made, the methods of understanding diseases have improved to such an extent that therapy can be developed to target them and if not, people still carry on trying right?
Whether it makes us a better person? I'm not sure.
As with all scenarios and all walks of life, you'll find people that are so overzealous in their work they try to overcome ethical boundaries to extend their research or whatnot, saying it's in the name of 'science'.
Sometimes it can allow for someone to become more appreciative of life and in other cases it can probably cause people to disregard matters that are important.
At the end of the day, I don't know, I guess it's the type of person you are to begin with and whether or not you can grow morally and scientifically.
If I've misunderstood what you've said, please forgive me and I'll delete this post.
 
glo said:
This leaves me with two questions for this thread:
  1. Can scientific knowledge help us become 'better human beings'?
    and
  2. Is it true that moral growth is more important than growing in scientific knowledge?
Click to expand...

1. Assuming "better human being" refers to our action towards others. I don't think scientific knowledge makes us any better. Science helps us solve problem but it is just an interest like anything else (sports, dancing, etc)

2. What do you mean by moral growth?
 
Answer:

Science, when it is being used as a way to improve our lives and appreciate the nuances of our existence is awesome (cough Quranic miracles cough:D).

Science when it is being sold as some affront to God, atheist propaganda, or reductionist philosophy crud must be destroyed. :)
 
not all of it, certainly not imaginary 11 dimensions etc, but science does at least indirectly make us more humane, think about it, without the products of science, technology etc we would still be in the neolithic age come morals. science makes us 'smarter', so perhaps morals depend on science to begin with-in our day and age atleast.
 
Last edited:
alcurad said:
not all of it, certainly not imaginary 11 dimensions etc, but science does at least indirectly make us more humane, think about it, without the products of science, technology etc we would still be in the neolithic age come morals.
Click to expand...

How exactly did science give morals?
 
simply put, morals-conceptually at the minimum-advanced alongside science.
 
AntiKarateKid said:
I disagree brother. People like Moses didnt bring any new scientific methods with him yet he advanced the morality of the Israelites.
Click to expand...

now that's a very narrow way of seeing it brother.. see I wasn't arguing that morals can't be advanced without science or it's by products to be exact.
 
Last edited:
Tornado said:
1. Assuming "better human being" refers to our action towards others. I don't think scientific knowledge makes us any better. Science helps us solve problem but it is just an interest like anything else (sports, dancing, etc)

2. What do you mean by moral growth?
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply, Tornado.

By moral growth I mean 'growing morally' or 'becoming better people' as defined in my OP:
"(For the sake of this thread I define 'better' as 'more humane' and 'of greater moral understanding', meaning attributes such as kindness, compassion, love, care for each other etc, etc.)"


Not being a philosopher either, perhaps I am not using the correct terminology, so for the sake of this thread we may have to go with the terminology as defined by myself ... :-[
 
Thank you for your contributions.
This is an interesting conversation. :)

As for morals developing together with scientific knowledge, I cannot speak for the times of the old prophets. But certainly in our modern times there are ethics committes attached to many sciences, whose job it is to debate and define the moral use of those new technologies.
According to that I would agree with alcurad: as our scientific understanding changes, perhaps so do our moral values ...
 
glo said:
This leaves me with two questions for this thread:
  1. Can scientific knowledge help us become 'better human beings'?
Click to expand...
(For the sake of this thread I define 'better' as 'more humane' and 'of greater moral understanding', meaning attributes such as kindness, compassion, love, care for each other etc, etc.)
Click to expand...
The obvious answer to that question is the field of Medicine.

and
[*]Is it true that moral growth is more important than growing in scientific knowledge?
[/LIST]

Looking forward to a peaceful discussion,
Click to expand...
I'd say they're both equally important, and inform one another. Now, some people may be more 'scientifically-minded' than others, but to me, that isn't to say that morality is above science or vice versa in the Grand Scale of Everything.

People just understand and learn things differently.
 
Last edited:
Greetings,

Improving humane understanding may or may not be a by-product of science, but it has little to do with science's main objective: improving human understanding.

[Do you see what I did there? :statisfie Sorry.]

I think we invent and update our morality. Netiquette (even though it's a hideous word) obviously wouldn't exist without the invention of the internet, but I don't think anyone sees netiquette as a scientific invention - it's just an adaptation of the morality people use all the time, and have always used.

Science is about the pursuit of knowledge. If such knowledge causes people to behave in good ways, then that's a bonus, a happy coincidence. Science can tell you how to do heart surgery or how to make an atomic bomb; knowledge is available that can lead to good or to evil. Which way we go is up to us, not up to science.

Peace
 
Muezzin said:
The obvious answer to that question is the field of Medicine.
Click to expand...

I think she's talking about better humans morally. With or without medicine, I think we'd have similar morals. Science and morality are connected. If you want to help someone whos suffering, you can look to science as one source of help.
I'd place moral growth above scientific knowledge.
 
czgibson said:
Science is about the pursuit of knowledge. If such knowledge causes people to behave in good ways, then that's a bonus, a happy coincidence. Science can tell you how to do heart surgery or how to make an atomic bomb; knowledge is available that can lead to good or to evil. Which way we go is up to us, not up to science.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much how I have always viewed science - fairly cold and detached, seeking knowledge without necessarily considering it good or bad ...
(Although, as I mentioned before, there are ethics committees who try to ensure that scientific advances are used for the greater good of mankind. Are those committees outside the actual scientific arena?)

On a personal not, czg, how do you rate the importance of science vs morals?

Interestingly I posted the very same OP in another forum.
One of the replies I got was that is may actually be our may be our "moral responsibility to develop an understanding of science - or whatever else might enable us to make life better for other people"

Interesting view - and one I have never considered.
Any thoughts?

Peace
 
czgibson said:
Improving humane understanding may or may not be a by-product of science, but it has little to do with science's main objective: improving human understanding.

[Do you see what I did there? :statisfie Sorry.]
Click to expand...
Now you are sounding like an English teacher!! :D
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top