Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MonkEfficient4237 t1_iv9o9kk wrote

Reply to comment by AllanfromWales1 in Science as a moral system by CartesianClosedCat

So, what are you arguing, that the outcome of science throughout the history was not moral, because of the financial aspect that tends to be involved? That would be ridiculous.

−1

AllanfromWales1 t1_iv9qldp wrote

No. I am arguing that science is an enterprise to improve human knowledge and understanding which is flawed by the drivers involved in it. I do not believe that even if it were perfect that would make it 'moral' under any rational interpretation of that term.

7

MonkEfficient4237 t1_iv9rzba wrote

Science works having at the base of its foundation moral principles and also creates moral outcomes, and also helps in revealing a better moral system for humans, so it is very hard for someone to say that morality has little to do with it like you are saying. The "yes but it is not being perfect" as an argument has little to no value in most discussions, at least to me, as it is already an abstract unachievable thing in the first place.

−5

AllanfromWales1 t1_iv9s4sh wrote

> as it is already an abstract unachievable thing in the first place

Morality?

More generally, that's like saying eyes are moral things because morality uses what they see. Which is nonsense.

2