Qs people asked me on science and my replies to them - part 223

Krishna: At least some scientists are atheists. Don't they follow ethics? They do! Without the help of religion. Ethics are not the sole property of religion.

Ethics is an integral part of science too. Like science, it requires us to be consistent and empirically justified in our interpretations of the actions of scientists. The ethics of science and science itself share the goal of comprehending in human terms scientists' actions in manipulating the physical world.

Anyone who knows how a nervous system works ( like a person of science) during pain processing can do no physical harm to any living being. And anyone who knows how the brain really works ( like a scientist or a medical doctor) at the emotional level will never try to harass another living being. Any person who has seen how the scientific rules are followed universally in a given set of conditions, and understood its beauty can never think in local terms and can never come under the influence of artificially created races, castes, groups, communities or citizenships. He sees all the living beings as his own images - following universal rules of life and as citizens of this universe.

To be frank science is a neutral study of the universe without any biases and prejudices. It exactly shows what reality of our universe is. And if that helps in human culture moral judgements? (3)

Like DNA fingerprinting helps in finding the culprits in forensic science who cheat others?

When it comes to questions of morality and meaning, the way we go about deciding what is right and wrong, and meaningful or not, is not the same as the way we discover what is true and false or facts. Some emotions like kindness and empathy will be involved. Controlling them is highly important to arrive at a good decision. Just because a criminal cries and acts funnily, you cannot support him. Oh yes, his brain could be differently wired! You try to analyze what could make any person behave so differently from others. On the other hand you can empathize with a poor thief when he steals food. But if you are a logical thinker you will try to understand what circumstances made him steal the food and try to correct them. Critical thinking helps here.

So far science has described how various social animals work in their groups, using various mechanisms to interact collectively. Bees use pheromones. Humans use emotions. And morality is just a word for emotional responses for how people do or do not behave according to 'rules' of the group they identify with. And science described it in spite of centuries of claims of mystical magical forces that made people behave as they do.

And all the morals are linked to emotions and emotions are controlled by science Read here how: Can science explain or deal with emotions and morals?

Unlike what several people think, science deals with moral ( derived from reasoning related to...empirical evidence) issues too and can be a good guide to life's journey through the checkerboard of blacks and whites!

I learned all about human existence, morality, humane nature, universal brotherhood, secularism, tolerance, inner strength and everything a human being should be from science! (1)

The reactions of non-specialist observers to complex ethical problems raised by cutting-edge science such as embryonic stem-cell research are no more justified or useful than their opinions about the technical difficulties yet to be overcome. The central issue in the ethical debate surrounding the embryo is not whether it is wrong to kill innocent human beings, but what the embryo and its disaggregation constitutes. The specialist scientific community's familiarity with the facts places it in a privileged position in determining the interpretation or interpretations best supported by the facts. (2)

As well as thinking of their actions in terms of future experimental design, scientists must explain the significance of their actions in the wider scientific and human contexts and remove misconceptions about science and scientists. Scientists must take the lead in ensuring that the progress of science is both ethical and as free from political and outside intervention as possible.

Scientists should strictly follow scientific method in the lab. No other rules can be applied to science. If they follow scientific method, scientists are following 'their rules'.

This universe itself follows scientific principles. It came into existence using these principles, and runs on them.

As a part of this universe, we human beings are also bound by these principles. Morals interrelated to emotions are indirectly controlled by 'science of this universe'.

Only thing is people outside of science should learn how this happens to go about morals without the help of religion if they want to like atheists and atheist-scientists do.

Footnotes:

1. Science and Spirituality

2. Science and ethics must not be separated.

3. Can science explain or deal with emotions and morals?

------

Q: Science says there is no evidence of God. But still I think only through God and religion, things like moralities can be imposed on people. Without fear of God, people tend to become beasts. What do you think?