Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
My skepticism in science (why is it that we can be skeptical about everything but science) is introduced by post #139 and by the post above.
|
Do you mean post #140? Please re-post and clarify.
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
The parlay and discussion of ethics in science is almost exclusively now the domain of scientists. Look at your post, you used industry and field specific language with no indication of what the ethics might be to an average person or a specialist in a different field. It's just indicated that we should trust the experts instead of appealing to the empiricism of the greater polity.
|
Am I correct in understanding that you are challenging the value that we as a society has attached to expert opinions? Do you feel that a better approach would be to treat all opinions on any given subject or idea as entirely equal, regardless of ones expertise?
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
...instead of accepting that these questions are only for the domain of scientific ethics, we either need to broaden the definition of science ethics to include contribution from the humanities (mainly philosophy and literature) or we need to start educating people on scientific issues so they are better able to answer these questions for themselves without relying on elite opinion...
|
I expect that the latter would meet would the most positive approval, but I really question how much the first statement holds true. Obviously, because there is even an ongoing debate about the ethical or moral consequences in stem-cell research demonstrates fairly clearly that the polity is NOT willing to leave the matter up to the "scientific elite".