@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan Yes, indeed. here I have to cite Carl Sagan again: "...in an uneasy truce with the more primitive brains beneath...".
Interesting discussion: Yes, of course, we do have to admit that science is not completely unconnected to us.
Interesting discussion: Yes, of course, we do have to admit that science is not completely unconnected to us.
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 1) This is an one hand trivial - we use our brains to perform science. And our brain is full of bias.
1a It's always easier to accept this, if you look into the past: The geocentric bias was hard to eovercome e.g.. As was the absolute space bias (--> relativity theory)...
1a It's always easier to accept this, if you look into the past: The geocentric bias was hard to eovercome e.g.. As was the absolute space bias (--> relativity theory)...
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 2) BUT: The scientific method is specifically designed to make it possible to overcome the bias. That has been working several times. Not that it's easy, we always had unpleasant debates. It always was worth it (that would be another thread).
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 3) Still, also these methods are based on our brains and our social connections. Science might be the most independent approach to reality (if it excists) we've ever had - but its not completely independent.
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 4) If there is this connection to the society (cant be neglected - research has at least to be financed) and to our brains (without them no science), the conditions for the sheer existance of the brains and the society are prerequisites to science.
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 5) Therefor: To keep the prerequisites, the brains must be allowed to further exist as is the society. And here we are already on an ethical level: This is one reason why there ethics is basic to science - in my humble oppinion has is even priority: And that is, how...
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 5a... most societies also see that and have a legal framework to enforce it: Ethics advisory boards, condemnation of biological weapons research or manipulation of the human genom, security guidlines for dangerous labs, ...
@ClarkAllister @douglasbholt @Dr2NisreenAlwan 6) So,yes,ethics has definitely a priority.On the other hand,good science is a much better basis for ethical decisions.{Examples:If you know the mortality of a disease,it will be a far better decision.If you know the sea level rise for CO2-paths,it can be a far better decision.}
