I have started lots of threads, over the years, about how science could answer moral questions. But, thanks to all the feedback I've gotten, I know realize I had this exactly backwards! Thanks to everyone, here, I now know that it is Morality that can answer Science questions, instead! Here's what I learned about how:
Science is only based on observation and experimentation and such. But, morality comes from feeling a much deeper understanding of assumptions, about how the Universe should work. We humans now have the power to proverbially "put the Universe in its place"!
I don't think it should be controversial, here, that morals can answer moral questions. For example, if we wanted to know if corporal punishment should be official policy in schools, or not, we can merely survey the teachers and principals about how they feel about it. Since the scientific studies on the subject, showing how bad such a policy is supposed to be, are all going to be ignored by most parties, anyway, morality can feel free to ignore them systematically, within that society. That much is eye-rollingly obvious.
But, morality can go even farther! Morality can ALSO answer SCIENCE questions! For example, if we wanted to know if the Earth was flat or round, we can first probe WHAT we want to do with the planet: If it is our moral duty to launch satellites to monitor the weather, so we can have more accurate information for crop growing; and assumptions about the Earth being flat don't seem to be able to deliver on that goal effectively, we can ditch them for the more-moral round-Earth ideas.
However, there is going to be some variation in the moral landscape, of course. If one belongs to a society of paranoid, delusional folks, who believe all satellites are spying on us; and that being on a flat Earth is much more convenient for map-making: Then we can effectively determine that the planet is, in fact, flat. Scientifically!!!
The nature of moral answers to scientific questions will, obviously, be very provisional, and subject to a lot of such variations, like that. But, that does not mean they cannot be consistently enforced! Any lawyer knows that, in the courtroom, The Law IS reality! The word of the law trumps any actual facts you might have on the matter. (This, of course, is why corporations can legally be declared "people".) So, as long as we pass laws that match our morals, we can uphold them as effectively, and as reliably, as any delusion we care to cater to!
I predict most academics won't see it this way, right away, of course. We are only entering the second quarter of 2015, after all. It will take some time, and generational turnover, before these ideas are widely accepted. But, I predict that, IN THE FUTURE , answering science questions will be a lot easier for us, and not so much reliant on the mere rigorous discipline of the scientific method. We can do it all with MORALITY!!!
What does everyone else think?!
Science is only based on observation and experimentation and such. But, morality comes from feeling a much deeper understanding of assumptions, about how the Universe should work. We humans now have the power to proverbially "put the Universe in its place"!
I don't think it should be controversial, here, that morals can answer moral questions. For example, if we wanted to know if corporal punishment should be official policy in schools, or not, we can merely survey the teachers and principals about how they feel about it. Since the scientific studies on the subject, showing how bad such a policy is supposed to be, are all going to be ignored by most parties, anyway, morality can feel free to ignore them systematically, within that society. That much is eye-rollingly obvious.
But, morality can go even farther! Morality can ALSO answer SCIENCE questions! For example, if we wanted to know if the Earth was flat or round, we can first probe WHAT we want to do with the planet: If it is our moral duty to launch satellites to monitor the weather, so we can have more accurate information for crop growing; and assumptions about the Earth being flat don't seem to be able to deliver on that goal effectively, we can ditch them for the more-moral round-Earth ideas.
However, there is going to be some variation in the moral landscape, of course. If one belongs to a society of paranoid, delusional folks, who believe all satellites are spying on us; and that being on a flat Earth is much more convenient for map-making: Then we can effectively determine that the planet is, in fact, flat. Scientifically!!!
The nature of moral answers to scientific questions will, obviously, be very provisional, and subject to a lot of such variations, like that. But, that does not mean they cannot be consistently enforced! Any lawyer knows that, in the courtroom, The Law IS reality! The word of the law trumps any actual facts you might have on the matter. (This, of course, is why corporations can legally be declared "people".) So, as long as we pass laws that match our morals, we can uphold them as effectively, and as reliably, as any delusion we care to cater to!
I predict most academics won't see it this way, right away, of course. We are only entering the second quarter of 2015, after all. It will take some time, and generational turnover, before these ideas are widely accepted. But, I predict that, IN THE FUTURE , answering science questions will be a lot easier for us, and not so much reliant on the mere rigorous discipline of the scientific method. We can do it all with MORALITY!!!
What does everyone else think?!
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1Il9j1T
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire