Science and morality

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Russell-Einstein Manifesto 9 July 1955

In the tragic situation which confronts humanity, we feel that scientists should assemble in conference to appraise the perils that have arisen as a result of the development of weapons of mass destruction, and to discuss a resolution in the spirit of the appended draft.

We are speaking on this occasion, not as members of this or that nation, continent, or creed, but as human beings, members of the species Man, whose continued existence is in doubt. The world is full of conflicts; and, overshadowing all minor conflicts, the titanic struggle between Communism and anti-Communism.

Almost everybody who is politically conscious has strong feelings about one or more of these issues; but we want you, if you can, to set aside such feelings and consider yourselves only as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire.

We shall try to say no single word which should appeal to one group rather than to another. All, equally, are in peril, and, if the peril is understood, there is hope that they may collectively avert it.

We have to learn to think in a new way. We have to learn to ask ourselves, not what steps can be taken to give military victory to whatever group we prefer, for there no longer are such steps; the question we have to ask ourselves is: what steps can be taken to prevent a military contest of which the issue must be disastrous to all parties?

The general public, and even many men in positions of authority, have not realized what would be involved in a war with nuclear bombs. The general public still thinks in terms of the obliteration of cities. It is understood that the new bombs are more powerful than the old, and that, while one A-bomb could obliterate Hiroshima, one H-bomb could obliterate the largest cities, such as London, New York, and Moscow.

No doubt in an H-bomb war great cities would be obliterated. But this is one of the minor disasters that would have to be faced. If everybody in London, New York, and Moscow were exterminated, the world might, in the course of a few centuries, recover from the blow. But we now know, especially since the Bikini test, that nuclear bombs can gradually spread destruction over a very much wider area than had been supposed.

It is stated on very good authority that a bomb can now be manufactured which will be 2,500 times as powerful as that which destroyed Hiroshima.

Such a bomb, if exploded near the ground or under water, sends radio-active particles into the upper air. They sink gradually and reach the surface of the earth in the form of a deadly dust or rain. It was this dust which infected the Japanese fishermen and their catch of fish.

No one knows how widely such lethal radio-active particles might be diffused, but the best authorities are unanimous in saying that a war with H-bombs might possibly put an end to the human race. It is feared that if many H-bombs are used there will be universal death, sudden only for a minority, but for the majority a slow torture of disease and disintegration.

Many warnings have been uttered by eminent men of science and by authorities in military strategy. None of them will say that the worst results are certain. What they do say is that these results are possible, and no one can be sure that they will not be realized. We have not yet found that the views of experts on this question depend in any degree upon their politics or prejudices. They depend only, so far as our researches have revealed, upon the extent of the particular expert’s knowledge. We have found that the men who know most are the most gloomy.

*(Continued in next post)
 
Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war? People will not face this alternative because it is so difficult to abolish war.

The abolition of war will demand distasteful limitations of national sovereignty.2 But what perhaps impedes understanding of the situation more than anything else is that the term “mankind” feels vague and abstract. People scarcely realize in imagination that the danger is to themselves and their children and their grandchildren, and not only to a dimly apprehended humanity. They can scarcely bring themselves to grasp that they, individually, and those whom they love are in imminent danger of perishing agonizingly. And so they hope that perhaps war may be allowed to continue provided modern weapons are prohibited.

This hope is illusory. Whatever agreements not to use H-bombs had been reached in time of peace, they would no longer be considered binding in time of war, and both sides would set to work to manufacture H-bombs as soon as war broke out, for, if one side manufactured the bombs and the other did not, the side that manufactured them would inevitably be victorious.

Although an agreement to renounce nuclear weapons as part of a general reduction of armaments3 would not afford an ultimate solution, it would serve certain important purposes.

First, any agreement between East and West is to the good in so far as it tends to diminish tension. Second, the abolition of thermo-nuclear weapons, if each side believed that the other had carried it out sincerely, would lessen the fear of a sudden attack in the style of Pearl Harbour, which at present keeps both sides in a state of nervous apprehension. We should, therefore, welcome such an agreement though only as a first step.

Most of us are not neutral in feeling, but, as human beings, we have to remember that, if the issues between East and West are to be decided in any manner that can give any possible satisfaction to anybody, whether Communist or anti-Communist, whether Asian or European or American, whether White or Black, then these issues must not be decided by war. We should wish this to be understood, both in the East and in the West.

There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness, knowledge, and wisdom. Shall we, instead, choose death, because we cannot forget our quarrels? We appeal as human beings to human beings: Remember your humanity, and forget the rest. If you can do so, the way lies open to a new Paradise; if you cannot, there lies before you the risk of universal death.

Resolution:

We invite this Congress, and through it the scientists of the world and the general public, to subscribe to the following resolution:

“In view of the fact that in any future world war nuclear weapons will certainly be employed, and that such weapons threaten the continued existence of mankind, we urge the governments of the world to realize, and to acknowledge publicly, that their purpose cannot be furthered by a world war, and we urge them, consequently, to find peaceful means for the settlement of all matters of dispute between them.”

Signatories:

Max Born
Percy W. Bridgman
Albert Einstein
Leopold Infeld
Frederic Joliot-Curie
Herman J. Muller
Linus Pauling
Cecil F. Powell
Joseph Rotblat
Bertrand Russell
Hideki Yukawa

history.com/topics/albert-einstein/videos/einstein-regret
 
Franklin Roosevelt’s “Day of Infamy” Speech:

Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives:

Yesterday, December 7th, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces.

I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.
Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.
Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.
Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.
Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.
And this morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves.

The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger.

. . .]
[Please read online. Also refer to previous page 8.]

history1900s.about.com/od/franklindroosevelt/a/Day-Of-Infamy-Speech.htm

I am proud to be an AMERICAN! I love my presidents! 😃
I’m also very fond of Los Alamos National Laboratory established in 1943:

Our primary responsibility throughout the decades: national security
The primary responsibility of the Laboratory is assuring the safety and reliability of the nation’s nuclear deterrent. Though the world is rapidly changing, this essential responsibility remains the core mission.

The people of Los Alamos continually work on advanced technologies to provide the United States with the best scientific and engineering solutions to many of the nation’s most crucial challenges.

Yesterday
The Laboratory was established in 1943 as site Y of the Manhattan Project for a single purpose: to design and build an atomic bomb.

It took just 20 months. On July 16, 1945, the world’s first atomic bomb was detonated 200 miles south of Los Alamos at Trinity Site on the Alamogordo bombing range. Under the scientific leadership of J. Robert Oppenheimer and the military direction of General Leslie R. Groves, scientists at the Laboratory had successfully weaponized the atom.

Hitler was defeated in Europe, but the Japanese Empire continued to wage an aggressive Pacific war. So President Harry S. Truman chose to employ atomic bombs in an effort to end WWII. Little Boy, a uranium gun-type weapon, was used against Hiroshima; Fat Man, an implosion plutonium bomb, was dropped on Nagasaki. On August 14, the war officially ended. An invasion of the Japanese home islands proved unnecessary, thus sparing thousands of American and Japanese lives.

Today
The Los Alamos of today has a heightened focus on worker safety and security awareness, with the ever-present core values of intellectual freedom, scientific excellence, and national service. Outstanding science underpins the Laboratory’s past and its future.
A rich variety of research programs directly and indirectly support the Laboratory’s basic mission: maintaining the safety, security, and reliability of the nation’s nuclear deterrent without the need to return to underground testing.

With a national security focus, the Laboratory also works on nuclear nonproliferation and border security, energy and infrastructure security, and countermeasures to nuclear and biological terrorist threats. As a foundation, the Laboratory conducts fundamental science in
 high-energy and applied physics and theory
 high-performance computing
 dynamic and energetic materials science
 superconductivity
 quantum information
 advanced materials
 bioinformatics
 theoretical and computational biology
 chemistry
 earth and environmental science
 alternative energy systems
 engineering sciences and application tomorrow
lanl.gov/about/history-innovation/index.php
 
As long as nuclear weapons exist it is likely that sooner or later they will be misused - as we can see by what is happening in North Korea. The only solution is universal disarmament constantly monitored by an international peacekeeping force. Any nation which refuses to comply should be treated as a pariah and deprived of all contact and trade with the rest of the world indefinitely…
 
As you have certainly made it your business to do.

God, not we, will be the judge of those who plan to kill and in the greatest abundance possible.
Amazing. You tell me it’s God not you who will judge, and then immediately you judge, convict and execute them by adding that you already decided they planned “to kill and in the greatest abundance”.

I’ve tried not to judge, but when the Pope said Christians don’t build walls, it was admittedly hard not to think of a couple of people who do that every day. After a mob judged Jesus with no process, it’s hard to see how or why Christians would think it’s morally good to crucify others with no process, but there you go. “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” - Matt 7
 
As long as nuclear weapons exist it is likely that sooner or later they will be misused - as we can see by what is happening in North Korea. The only solution is universal disarmament constantly monitored by an international peacekeeping force. Any nation which refuses to comply should be treated as a pariah and deprived of all contact and trade with the rest of the world indefinitely…
I don’t know about that. When your daughter does something bad, do you lock her in the cellar, deprived of all contact, and tell her you won’t love her until she complies? Did that approach work with North Korea? The Chinese resist pressure to further isolate North Korea because they don’t want a collapsed state on their border. Are Christians called to create outcasts and build walls around them? Or to build fraternal bridges? Would Obama have done better to further isolate Iran rather than working towards an agreement to bring them back into the world?
 
Amazing. You tell me it’s God not you who will judge, and then immediately you judge, convict and execute them by adding that you already decided they planned “to kill and in the greatest abundance”.

I’ve tried not to judge, but when the Pope said Christians don’t build walls, it was admittedly hard not to think of a couple of people who do that every day. After a mob judged Jesus with no process, it’s hard to see how or why Christians would think it’s morally good to crucify others with no process, but there you go. “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” - Matt 7
Listen to yourself!!!

Sounds like you want to abolish the police and the courts and the prisons.

Just let evil reign and make no judgment whatever concerning the evildoers.

Just let the evil ones party on the pretext that we are evil to note their deeds. 🤷
 
Listen to yourself!!!

Sounds like you want to abolish the police and the courts and the prisons.

Just let evil reign and make no judgment whatever concerning the evildoers.

Just let the evil ones party on the pretext that we are evil to note their deeds. 🤷
By living in America, you give your commander in chief responsibility to make decisions for your defense. If you don’t agree with those decisions then you have access to courts of law, but instead you choose to snipe anonymously on an internet forum.

No court of justice would prejudge its verdict and deny the accused a defense as you have done, and as far as I know neither Americans nor Japanese nor your Church share your wish to crucify those scientists.

But beyond that, for the last week I’ve been trying to find any New Testament in your version of justice, and have drawn a total blank.

See you around.
 
I don’t know about that. When your daughter does something bad, do you lock her in the cellar, deprived of all contact, and tell her you won’t love her until she complies? Did that approach work with North Korea? The Chinese resist pressure to further isolate North Korea because they don’t want a collapsed state on their border. Are Christians called to create outcasts and build walls around them? Or to build fraternal bridges? Would Obama have done better to further isolate Iran rather than working towards an agreement to bring them back into the world?
The fact that Kim Jong-un is deliberately testing nuclear missiles is indicative of a hostile attitude to South Korea that nation has done nothing to deserve. What form of agreement do you have in mind?
 
As long as nuclear weapons exist it is likely that sooner or later they will be misused - as we can see by what is happening in North Korea. The only solution is universal disarmament constantly monitored by an international peacekeeping force. Any nation which refuses to comply should be treated as a pariah and deprived of all contact and trade with the rest of the world indefinitely…
Tonyrey, you live in dreamland! People kill people in the United States. There are wars going on around the globe. People are dying thus I don’t agree with your statement. It may sound pretty but it isn’t going to happen because people have the ability to voice their disagreements thus act them out! I highly doubt there will be international peace in my lifetime. However, I am comforted by knowing what Director McMillian states.

Let’s get back to Los Alamos National Laboratory! I’m a United States Citizen and fully support LANL. Here is an excerpt from their website :

Overview
Charlie McMillan, Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory
1:06
Director McMillan on nuclear deterrence
National security and weapons science is at the core of ensuring the safety, security, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent and protecting against a radiological or nuclear attack on the United States. The research performed by laboratory scientists and engineers provides the base from which new, innovative solutions are developed for the nation’s nuclear security problems.
**
Capabilities**
National security and weapons science at the laboratory spans essentially all the physical, life, and engineering sciences. Notable examples include:

nuclear physics
chemistry
engineering
computer and information science
earth and space sciences
materials science
engineering
chemistry
biosciences
energetic materials
and many others

Computer modeling as part of U.S. Stockpile Stewardship ProgramComputer modeling as part of U.S. Stockpile Stewardship Program.
National security and weapons science supports a variety of deployed systems, both for the nuclear stockpile and for monitoring and understanding natural and man-made phenomena.

LANL is the design agency for the W76/W88 Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile warheads, the W78 Intercontinental Ballistic Missile warhead, and the B61 gravity bomb. These four systems constitute 80 percent of the nation’s on-alert nuclear deterrent.

Examples of monitoring systems include ground- and space-based systems that LANL produces for detecting violations of nuclear-test treaties.

. . .]
lanl.gov/science-innovation/capabilities/national-security-weapons-science/index.php
 
As long as nuclear weapons exist it is likely that sooner or later they will be misused - as we can see by what is happening in North Korea. The only solution is universal disarmament constantly monitored by an international peacekeeping force. Any nation which refuses to comply should be treated as a pariah and deprived of all contact and trade with the rest of the world indefinitely…
The fact remains that as long as nuclear weapons exist it is likely that sooner or later they will be misused. North Korea appears to be preparing for a fifth nuclear test even though the UN Security Council has consistently condemned such actions as a breach of sanctions imposed after its first nuclear test in 2006. The question is how “fraternal bridges” can be built after ten years of persistent defiance of an international agreement. It is obviously not impossible but is there any evidence that Kim Jong-un is prepared to backtrack on his nuclear policy?
 
As long as nuclear weapons exist it is likely that sooner or later they will be misused - as we can see by what is happening in North Korea. The only solution is universal disarmament constantly monitored by an international peacekeeping force. Any nation which refuses to comply should be treated as a pariah and deprived of all contact and trade with the rest of the world indefinitely…
An excellent example of an ad hominem!
People kill people in the United States. There are wars going on around the globe. People are dying thus I don’t agree with your statement. It may sound pretty but it isn’t going to happen because people have the ability to voice their disagreements thus act them out! I highly doubt there will be international peace in my lifetime. However, I am comforted by knowing what Director McMillian states.
This sounds like unjustified defeatism. Why haven’t any atomic weapons been used for the last seventy years?
Let’s get back to Los Alamos National Laboratory! I’m a United States Citizen and fully support LANL. Here is an excerpt from their website :
Overview
Charlie McMillan, Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory
1:06
Director McMillan on nuclear deterrence
National security and weapons science is at the core of ensuring the safety, security, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent and protecting against a radiological or nuclear attack on the United States. The research performed by laboratory scientists and engineers provides the base from which new, innovative solutions are developed for the nation’s nuclear security problems.
**
Capabilities**
National security and weapons science at the laboratory spans essentially all the physical, life, and engineering sciences. Notable examples include:
nuclear physics
chemistry
engineering
computer and information science
earth and space sciences
materials science
engineering
chemistry
biosciences
energetic materials
and many others
Computer modeling as part of U.S. Stockpile Stewardship ProgramComputer modeling as part of U.S. Stockpile Stewardship Program.
National security and weapons science supports a variety of deployed systems, both for the nuclear stockpile and for monitoring and understanding natural and man-made phenomena.
LANL is the design agency for the W76/W88 Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile warheads, the W78 Intercontinental Ballistic Missile warhead, and the B61 gravity bomb. These four systems constitute 80 percent of the nation’s on-alert nuclear deterrent.
Examples of monitoring systems include ground- and space-based systems that LANL produces for detecting violations of nuclear-test treaties.
The undeniable fact remains that as long as nuclear weapons exist there is a risk they will get into the wrong hands…
 
I’m sort of with you. The notion that it was immoral for scientists to do their duty to protect their country, if applied to everyone else, would mean America would now be an Axis colony, and any American who didn’t collaborate would be a slave. It’s a bit stunning how some have completely forgotten the fanatical barbarism of the Axis powers, and how quick they are to judge others.

I’ve never had to make a decision about killing to defend my country, and can only have great respect for those who do. The commanders’ in chief decision to drop the Bomb was such a decision. So you’ll get no argument from me that they are owed some semper fidelis (“always loyal”). Respect.

To all those who keep us free - youtube.com/watch?v=MgoZWQ1opDE
There is a wealth of evidence from military experts that dropping atomic bombs on Japan was quite unnecessary:

colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/atomicdec.htm
 
There is a wealth of evidence from military experts that dropping atomic bombs on Japan was quite unnecessary:

colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/atomicdec.htm
I agree that as the Bomb was developed as a deterrent, it should never have been deployed.
The fact that Kim Jong-un is deliberately testing nuclear missiles is indicative of a hostile attitude to South Korea that nation has done nothing to deserve. What form of agreement do you have in mind?
Don’t know much about international politics, but here’s one idea I’ve heard.

The dictatorship is very wicked, and holds on to power by isolating the people from the rest of the world. So it would play into the regime’s hands to further isolate the people by cutting them off with an embargo.

The opposite is needed, to break the isolation, just as the Soviet block started to crumble once its people saw how much better life was elsewhere. So the notion is to surreptitiously flood NK with communications technology - internet, pads, broadcasts - to let the people see whatever they want, and they will become more and more dissatisfied until the regime is forced to negotiate.

I think that’s a good idea. Even something as simple as this pop song lyric would introduce them to ideas they never dreamed of:

*"It’s our party we can do what we want
It’s our party we can say what we want
It’s our party we can love who we want
We can kiss who we want
We can sing what we want

…] We run things, things don’t run we
Don’t take nothing from nobody"

youtube.com/watch?v=2mjvfnUAfyo&list=PL6EL0OdOZ8FrTn1Jk5kU_hnuRWtBDP-rd&index=8*

(not a song for Puritans :))
 
There is a wealth of evidence from military experts that dropping atomic bombs on Japan was quite unnecessary:

colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/atomicdec.htm
Sure, if the US wanted to waste tens of thousands of lives on an invasion of the Japanese Main Islands. As it was, it took two of the bombs to finally convince Japan to surrender, and even then, there were senior members of the military and government who made a last ditch attempt to prevent the Emperor from ordering the unconditional surrender.

Oh, and then there were the Soviets who almost certainly would have begun their own invasion from the north. Forcing the quick surrender of Japan was least of all evils.
 
I agree that as the Bomb was developed as a deterrent, it should never have been deployed.

Don’t know much about international politics, but here’s one idea I’ve heard.

The dictatorship is very wicked, and holds on to power by isolating the people from the rest of the world. So it would play into the regime’s hands to further isolate the people by cutting them off with an embargo.

The opposite is needed, to break the isolation, just as the Soviet block started to crumble once its people saw how much better life was elsewhere. So the notion is to surreptitiously flood NK with communications technology - internet, pads, broadcasts - to let the people see whatever they want, and they will become more and more dissatisfied until the regime is forced to negotiate.

I think that’s a good idea. Even something as simple as this pop song lyric would introduce them to ideas they never dreamed of:

*"It’s our party we can do what we want
It’s our party we can say what we want
It’s our party we can love who we want
We can kiss who we want
We can sing what we want

…] We run things, things don’t run we
Don’t take nothing from nobody"

youtube.com/watch?v=2mjvfnUAfyo&list=PL6EL0OdOZ8FrTn1Jk5kU_hnuRWtBDP-rd&index=8*

(not a song for Puritans :))
It’s a good idea but in such a small nation it must be very difficult to oppose a ruthless dictator…
 
*There is a wealth of evidence from military experts that dropping atomic bombs on Japan was quite unnecessary:
The President in giving his approval for these [atomic] attacks appeared to believe that many thousands of American troops would be killed in invading Japan, and in this he was entirely correct; but King felt, as he had pointed out many times, that the dilemma was an unnecessary one, for had we been willing to wait, the effective naval blockade would, in the course of time, have starved the Japanese into submission through lack of oil, rice, medicines, and other essential materials. (See p. 327, Chapter 26)
As Japan faltered in July an effort was made by several top Navy officials–almost certainly including Secretary Forrestal himself–to end the war without using the atomic bomb. Forrestal made a special trip to Potsdam to discuss the issue and was involved in the Atlantic Charter broadcast. Many other top Admirals criticized the bombing both privately and publicly. (Forrestal, see pp. 390-392, Chapter 31; p. 398, Chapter 31) (Strauss, see p. 333, Chapter 26; pp. 393-394, Chapter 31) (Bard, see pp. 225-227, Chapter 18; pp. 390-391, Chapter 31)
Air Force General Claire Chennault, the founder of the American Volunteer Group (the famed “Flying Tigers”)–and Army Air Forces commander in China–was even more blunt: A few days after Hiroshima was bombed The New York Times
reported Chennault’s view that:
Russia’s entry into the Japanese war was the decisive factor in speeding its end and would have been so even if no atomic bombs had been dropped. . . . (See pp. 335-336, Chapter 27)
Former President Herbert Hoover met with MacArthur alone for several hours on a tour of the Pacific in early May 1946. His diary states:

I told MacArthur of my memorandum of mid-May 1945 to Truman, that peace could be had with Japan by which our major objectives would be accomplished. MacArthur said that was correct and that we would have avoided all of the losses, the Atomic bomb, and the entry of Russia into Manchuria. (See pp. 350-351, Chapter 28)
Brigadier Gen. Carter W. Clarke, the officer in charge of preparing MAGIC intercepted cable summaries in 1945, stated in a 1959 interview:
we brought them [the Japanese] down to an abject surrender through the accelerated sinking of their merchant marine and hunger alone, and when we didn’t need to do it, and we knew we didn’t need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn’t need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs. (See p. 359, Chapter 28)
 
“It is sometimes said that science has nothing to do with morality. This is wrong. Science is the search for truth, the effort to understand the world; it involves the rejection of bias, of dogma, of revelation, but not the rejection of morality.” Linus Pauling

I have never heard a more confused and absurd definition of the relationship between science, dogma, and morality.

The scientist by the nature of his science can neither accept nor reject dogma, revelation, or morality.

When the scientist concerns himself with any of these matters, he thinks or acts not as a scientist but as a philosopher, or humanist, or theologian struggling to understand matters with which science has no familiarity whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top