Does science make us better people?

[alcurad]

in a nut-nutshell: morals are modes of behavior, they increase in complexity as society becomes more complex, which is driven to an extent by science. even though the need for morals precedes science.
more complex/advanced morals means their growth.

 

[glo]

how could there be bad scientific knowledge though? it's how you use it.

You are right. I think that's what I mean ...

Are (some) scientists merely concerned with the gaining of scientific knowledge, without giving thought to whether this knowledge is likely to be used for good or bad?

 

[Tornado]

how could there be bad scientific knowledge though? it's how you use it.

Kind of agree. There are bad ways to acquire scientific knowledge.
I think we know the around which the human body freezes or dies. That was when scientific knowledge > morality.

 

[Wilma_Hum]

I don't see how Scientific Knowledge can have any impact on kindness, compassion, love, care for each other.

Am I missing something?

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

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?)

I suppose you could see them as being part of the scientific enterprise. We have to hope that such groups are effective, because dangerous knowledge does have a tendency to get into the wrong hands.

On a personal note, czg, how do you rate the importance of science vs morals?

I think the pursuit of knowledge and trying to behave morally are both important parts of our nature. They are largely responsible for our survival thus far, and I'm not sure whether I could rank either of them higher than the other.

If you asked me a hypothetical question like: "If you knew you would be given the cure for cancer, but only after you killed a hundred people, what would you do?" I would have to think about that for quite a while.

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?

With the proviso that says "as long as we can afford scientific education", I would agree. We could never say that a person in starving poverty was blameworthy if they had no access to scientific education, for instance.

Peace

 

[glo]

With the proviso that says "as long as we can afford scientific education", I would agree. We could never say that a person in starving poverty was blameworthy if they had no access to scientific education, for instance.
Peace

I had assumed that the person making the statement that we have "a moral responsibility to develop an understanding of science" meant 'within the limitation of our own ability' - be that financial, intellectual or whatever.

Anyway, I like the way this thread is developing.

To save myself all that hard thinking I think I will pull up a chair, grab my knitting and enjoy the ride.

 

[Muezzin]

I don't see how Scientific Knowledge can have any impact on kindness, compassion, love, care for each other.

Using humans as guinea pigs without their knowledge is one instance of overlap.

But maybe that's medical ethics as opposed to morality.

Tomayto, tomahto.

 

[Wilma_Hum]

Using humans as guinea pigs without their knowledge is one instance of overlap.

But maybe that's medical ethics as opposed to morality.

Tomayto, tomahto.

I don't see much of a gap between ethics and morals.

If I use "humans as guinea pigs", I have an ethic or moral problem, not science.

 

[Muezzin]

I don't see much of a gap between ethics and morals.

If I use "humans as guinea pigs", I have an ethic or moral problem, not science.

What if not testing in those conditions would hamper scientific advance?

That sort of bizarre mad-scientist mentality tied into the concept of sacrifices being made for the greater good.

 

[Wilma_Hum]

What if not testing in those conditions would hamper scientific advance?

That sort of bizarre mad-scientist mentality tied into the concept of sacrifices being made for the greater good.

But that isn't the question is it? The question, as I see it is "Does science make us better (more moral) people?"
But to answer the question, "The end does not justify the means".

 

[Whatsthepoint]

It can, through technology and economic progress which in turn brings social changes, some considered postivie, some negative.
Technology also gives us plenty of free time to ponder about who we are.

 

[Muezzin]

It can, through technology and economic progress which in turn brings social changes, some considered postivie, some negative.
Technology also gives us plenty of free time to ponder about who we are.

To ponder and express who we are. To see where we're going and to ensure we don't repeat the mistakes of the past.

Well, that's the idea at least...

 

[Danah]

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,

well I dont think that we can get a specific answer whether yes or no for such question

the continuous improving in science and how well the science can be merged with technology to become really helpful in medicine treatment and save many people lives.
Who was expecting that human will be able to transplant a heart from one body to another?...that was something impossible even to think about, but with the improving science, this become something possible.


but at the same time, it make the people more greedy specially in some places in the world where there are many forbidden experiments are worked on, and most of them are against morals.
I think some people are using the science as tools for their own good to get the financial benefit from it like selling and buying human organs.

so science is a double edged sword....this is my point

 

[glo]

so science is a double edged sword....this is my point

SAYA's post is making me ponder ...

Much as humans strive to learn more and understand more (apart from you guys who are still at school - haha! :giggling, and much as we may think of scientific advances as advantageous ... might there be knowledge which we may be better off never gaining? Or knowledge we are perhaps not meant to have??

Any thoughts?

 

[AntiKarateKid]

What would the Prophet say?

The Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) explicitly encouraged scientific knowledge in these words, “Listen to the words of the learned and instill into others the lessons of science, for it is better than religious exercises”. In another tradition the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) stressed the search for knowledge. He says, “Don’t simply be narrator of knowledge, examine, verify and put to test all that you are told, that will help you to find the ultimate truth.” In order to avoid conflict between science and religion the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) provided the best guideline in this tradition, “Reflect on the creation of Allah and do not reflect in Allah.”


Science helps us better appreciate God and his awesomeness. Its pretty cool to know the structure of the human eye, eagle eye, bug eye.

As long as it isnt panned in an atheistic reductionist manner, science and religion are good for the soul.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

SAYA's post is making me ponder ...

Much as humans strive to learn more and understand more (apart from you guys who are still at school - haha! :giggling, and much as we may think of scientific advances as advantageous ... might there be knowledge which we may be better off never gaining? Or knowledge we are perhaps not meant to have??

Any thoughts?

Why? I could use the knowlege I know about the sun to better disprove people who belive in a sun god.

Science is merely examination of God's creation.


WHen science changes from the means to the end, to the end itself, then there is a problem.

 

[Woodrow]

I think the problem lies in that as humans we attempt to apply the knowledge we have to all aspects of what we do not know.

In other words we seem to intermingle:

Science
Religion
Philosophy
Sociology

We apply the terminology of the one we are most comfortable with to the other 3.

In it's simplist understanding science is just a tool of measurement. It has no more bearing upon morality and ethics than a yard stick has.

 

[Danah]

SAYA's post is making me ponder ...

Much as humans strive to learn more and understand more (apart from you guys who are still at school - haha! :giggling, and much as we may think of scientific advances as advantageous ... might there be knowledge which we may be better off never gaining? Or knowledge we are perhaps not meant to have??

Any thoughts?

exactly, this is what I meant by working in many forbidden experiments behind the morals organization back, some of those dangerous experiments can wiped the life from the surface of the earth. Some are playing with the human life and changing many things that allah has grant us with. They cant do it at the end but they scarify many human lives by just try to play with Allah creation

What would the Prophet say?

Science helps us better appreciate God and his awesomeness. Its pretty cool to know the structure of the human eye, eagle eye, bug eye.

As long as it isnt panned in an atheistic reductionist manner, science and religion are good for the soul.

and this is the good side of the science, knowing more help us to strengthen our belief, especially when we look at the scientific facts that are already mentioned in the Quran

 

[KAding]

Good question glo!

At first glance, I would be tempted to answer 'no': that science does not in itself help us become more moral persons. Knowledge can be used to do both good and evil. In the end, however, if you believe that humans are inherently more likely to be good, then the answer would be that overall science is likely to help us to become better human beings, simply because it provides us with the knowledge we need to make difficult choices that may have moral implications. If, on the other hand, you believe humans will only abuse this knowledge for personal gain and selfish reasons, then IMHO it would rather have a negative impact on our morality.

I overall have a fairly positive view of humans, so I'm leaning towards the former. This is not based on data though, it is simply my belief. Unfortunately, all positive examples I can think of also have darker sides. Take animal rights: IMHO better insight into animal behavior, psychology and biology have led to an increasingly strong animal rights movement, simply because of an increased understanding that animals aren't necessarily in a different class from us. On the other hand, advances in science and technology have led to increasingly inhumane forms of industrial farming. It's almost as if at an individual level we use this scientific knowledge to be better humans, but at an institutional level we also fail to weed out morally dubious options that science provides us.

So overall, I would say that science itself does not make our society as a whole more moral. However, a side effect of science, namely increasing wealth and prosperity, does put us in the luxurious position of being able to make moral choices more easily. IMHO the richer we get, the more likely we are to do what is right, such as care for the poor, protect those who need protection and preserve our environment for future generations.

 

[Muezzin]

IMHO the richer we get, the more likely we are to do what is right, such as care for the poor, protect those who need protection and preserve our environment for future generations.

I see where you're coming from, but I can't really agree on this point - the richer certain people get, the greedier and more miserly they become.