Very rude, too
Why rude?? YOu must come up with the strength of your own arguments rather than try to 'win' by the weakness of your opponent's arguments,..that's a universal rule,,also in the judiciary!!
Religous law making a comeback
- Thread starter The Man
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Why rude?? YOu must come up with the strength of your own arguments rather than try to 'win' by the weakness of your opponent's arguments,..that's a universal rule,,also in the judiciary!!
-
284Replies
-
4KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Here is a reply to Man's question posed to you,,,,read it stone and crack your head in the loo!!
Science, morals and ethics
There are no morals in science! Morals change with time as the cultural gamodeme changes. Today they are predominantly within the domain of religion for most cultural gamodemes, and I believe are unacceptable as guidelines for scientific research.
Ethical guidelines are a different matter to moral issues. They pertain more to scientific prudence than to a tribal, mythical, belief system. Science needs ethical guidelines because scientific progress also can open by-ways that are potentially exploitable by the unscrupulous. Logic not religion or political values should control ethical guidelines. The interference of morals into what are really ethical issues are a problem in the current global cultural gamodeme. Science should play no part in moral issues but can provide important insight into ethical issues, and developing ethical guidelines for specific social problems that are the concern of government. Issues that are regarded as moral issues by many is an artifact produced by insufficient science education provided to our population. The result is an inability of individuals to understand the potential of science, and indeed, to see the improvements that scientific progress can bring to the people. This 'scientific knowledge gap' allows inferior methods of reasoning, based upon intuition and revelation promulgated by charismatic leaders and authority, to gain influence. An influence that is based primarily upon religiosity and promulgated by ignorant and/or self seeking politicians who fail to serve the people in the best manner they can.
One issue of current importance is developing ethical guidelines for Reproductive Cloning. If left alone, as a normal st http://www.geol.lsu.edu/hart/NOTES/sci_mor_eth.htm
Science, morals and ethics
There are no morals in science! Morals change with time as the cultural gamodeme changes. Today they are predominantly within the domain of religion for most cultural gamodemes, and I believe are unacceptable as guidelines for scientific research.
Ethical guidelines are a different matter to moral issues. They pertain more to scientific prudence than to a tribal, mythical, belief system. Science needs ethical guidelines because scientific progress also can open by-ways that are potentially exploitable by the unscrupulous. Logic not religion or political values should control ethical guidelines. The interference of morals into what are really ethical issues are a problem in the current global cultural gamodeme. Science should play no part in moral issues but can provide important insight into ethical issues, and developing ethical guidelines for specific social problems that are the concern of government. Issues that are regarded as moral issues by many is an artifact produced by insufficient science education provided to our population. The result is an inability of individuals to understand the potential of science, and indeed, to see the improvements that scientific progress can bring to the people. This 'scientific knowledge gap' allows inferior methods of reasoning, based upon intuition and revelation promulgated by charismatic leaders and authority, to gain influence. An influence that is based primarily upon religiosity and promulgated by ignorant and/or self seeking politicians who fail to serve the people in the best manner they can.
One issue of current importance is developing ethical guidelines for Reproductive Cloning. If left alone, as a normal st http://www.geol.lsu.edu/hart/NOTES/sci_mor_eth.htm
Well said.
It is up to maz now to support some of his positions.
Science is like a rose without color and fragrance,tangible. Morals are various colors and fragrances of flowers, intangible.
To doubt what?
again a pot and kettle hand in hand!! Shame!
If you don't know that then you must quit the debate,,,'
Google for the definition of doubt and its implications on science and morals,,,'
I am not here to teach kindergarten children
You have already been told what science is.
Actually science can tell us why the color of the rose and why it has frangrance...you are simply wrong again maz.
A flower has no morals as it has no thought.
You shouldn't have brought up the subject.
No, the scientific method is about allowing challenge to disprove certainty.
Science is the accumulated body of knowledge from using the scientific method of investigation.
You silly Pakistani
did you go to school?? Don't you know what a metaphor is ??
You are just a big fool! Science itself is just 2 +2=4 ....it only tries to find out what is already there,,,,by 'doubting' ofcourse. Morals and ethics are Not science nor they depend on science...even the wildest kinds of human beings have morals...even thieves and thugs have their own moral compendium ..,,you cannot draw a straight line on morals..eventhough some morals are universally accepted while some aren''t.
You cannot claim your morals to be superior than others. But Science is the same everywhere,,,,,same, yes.
not stupider than you and your side kick...
One musnt read any further that the first sentences of your post.
You have only supported our position.
Since there are no morals in science then science can not destroy them.
Have you read your own posts?.......
I read when I write,,,you only cherry pick phrases out of context...no one is going to believe you
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members