Is Science Morally Neutral?

Posted by our Chronicler, Brendt M.

           How does science affect our everyday lives?

           We listed some of the different scientific fields that seem to make an impact on one's everyday life. To name a few:

> Astronomy
> Chemistry
> Physics
> Metaphysics
> Psychology
> Meteorology

           We also said that science ought to glorify God.

           A few years ago, during a long speech about health policy, President George W. Bush spoke about a society increasingly empowered by science.  He warned:

           "The powers of science are morally neutral - as easily used for bad purposes as good ones.  In the excitement of discovery, we must never forget that mankind is defined not by intelligence alone, but by conscience.  Even the most noble ends do not justify every means."

           The president implied that science only provides tools that give us raw power and it is up to us to determine the right ways to use that power and to proscribe the wrong ways.

           The notion that science is morally neutral is widely held by scientists.  Many wear this as a badge of honour, presenting themselves as disinterested servants of truth.  They supply society with facts and tools and its up to others how to use them.

           Einstein once said: "Science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be and outside of its domain value judgement of all kinds remain necessary".

           Do you agree or disagree?

           Our philosopher this week was Francis Bacon.

           He was an English philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, and author. He has been called the creator of empiricism and his works established and popularized inductive methodologies for scientific inquiry, often called the Baconian method, or simply the scientific method. He was knighted in 1603 and died in 1626 by contracting pneumonia while studying the effects of freezing meat. He was also a friend of Thomas Hobbes, one of the other philosophers we have studied.

           Finally, he said that anything can be made evil in the hands of evil men.

           I would argue that this is not the most essential moral challenge posed for us by modern science.

           Modern science is much more than a source of technology and scientists are far more than mere investigators and toolmakers.  Modern science is a grand human endeavour.  Its work employs the best and brightest from all over the world and its way of thinking has come to dominate the way mankind understands itself and its place.

           The modern scientific project was not conceived or born as a morally neutral quest after facts.  On the contrary, launched in the 17th century, it was a profoundly moral enterprise, aimed at improving the condition of the human race, relieving suffering, enhancing health and enriching life.

           Francis Bacon argued that a search for knowledge driving solely by a natural curiosity would be misguided and inadequate.  He said that the true aim of a genuine science should be "the glory of the Creator and the relief of man's estate".

           Rene Descartes had an equally moral purpose in mind.  His mathematical science aims not at neutral knowledge or the creation of frivolous mechanical toys but principally at "the conservation of health, which is without doubt the primary good and the foundation of all other goods in life".

           We concluded with a discussion of the book The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson.

What is a Lie?

Posted by our Chronicler, Brendt M.

           A lie is an untruth or false statement with intent.

           Is it ever okay to lie? Is lying ever morally required?

           John Stuart Mill was an English philosopher who many people regarded as being "the most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century". He was a very smart man who strongly believed that philosophy could improve society. He knew Greek by age three and Latin and Algebra by age eight. He was known as the father of Utilitarianism.

           Utilitarianism is a theory centered on the idea that the moral worth of an action depends on its results. In other words, of the possible actions open to you, you should choose the one that will do the greatest good for the greatest number, that is, the one that will maximize happiness.
           Deontology, on the other hand, is a theory that says we are required to perform certain moral duties regardless of the consequences.

           Our other philosopher was Immanuel Kant. He was a German philosopher who believed that Deontology was the correct theory of the two. He also disagreed both with Socrates' view that we are born with knowledge, and with David Hume's view that all knowledge comes from experience.

           Consider the following example:

           A girl has a date for a formal dance. She dresses up in her finest clothes and greets him when he arrives at the door. He asks, "How do I look?". The truth is that he looks foolish. His suit does not fit right - the sleeves are too short, and the pants are too long. Furthermore, his hair is totally overdone.

If you were in her position, what would you tell him? If you were in his position, would you want to know the truth?

What is Law?

Posted by our Chronicler, Brendt M.

           We defined law as the rules of right and wrong made by the government.

           We said that there were two kinds of law: public and private. Public law is concerned with matters that affect society as a whole, such as criminal law, tax law, and constitutional law. Private law (also called "civil law") deals with the relationships between individuals; those laws are insurance law, torts law, and property law.

           Laws help to ensure a safe and peaceful society in which peoples rights are respected. Without laws, the world would be a place of constant chaos and there would be anarchy.

           What is anarchy? Anarchy is a state of disorder due to lack of government. Anarchists believe that most people can govern themselves and would be happier doing so. Some philosophers defend anarchy as a legitimate political position.
 

           Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were philosophers that wrote about government and theorized about what man's "state of nature" would be if there was no kind of authority.  Hobbes described life in the state of nature as being "nasty, poor, brutish, and short." He believed that men are constantly at war because they cannot all have the same thing, and that the best form of government is to give all the power to one man.

 

 

Locke, on the other hand, theorized that our state of nature is a state of freedom, equality, and independence. In this state of nature one has the freedom to do whatever one wants within the boundaries of nature, that no one has power or authority over another, therefore everyone is equal, and that everyone is put into a state if independence, and they remain in it until they choose to become members of a political society. He believed that all of this would be governed by one law: the law of reason.

 

 

 

 

           Even in a well-ordered society, people have disagreements, and conflicts arise; the law provides a way to resolve disputes peacefully. An essential principle is that the same law applies to everybody, including the police, governments and public officials, who must carry out their public duties according to the law.

 

         Ever since people began to live together in society laws have been necessary to hold that society together. Imagine the chaos and danger if drivers just chose which side of the street to drive on!

What is a Paradox?

Posted by our new Chronicler, Brendt M.

We tackled the subject of existence. A few profound questions came such as, "How do you know you're not asleep?" And, "If I'm dreaming how do I know the dream is not real?"

           A French philosopher from the early 1600's named René Descartes challenged people to prove that they are not dreaming. He was famous for saying, "I think, therefore I am." Most people might think that this means: "I am capable of rational thought, therefore I am a human being." But what Descartes meant was if you think, you must exist.

           We also talked about paradoxes. What is a paradox? A paradox is a situation which seems entirely normal, but after further investigation proves to be impossible or self-contradictory. Take a look at the image below.

At first, when you look at this, you think it's just a bunch of weird-looking soldiers walking up a staircase and a second set of them walking down. But then you realize they are walking in a circle! You see, this drawing seems normal until you find the contradiction that makes it impossible.

Another example of a paradox is The Theory of Relativism. This theory says that there is no such thing as a single truth for everyone. It is easy to refute relativism, because it is self-refuting. A few examples of relativism would be:

"You should never tell anyone what to do."

"There are no absolute truths."

"No statement is universally true."

Obviously, these statements contradict themselves.

Most philosophers reject the concept of relativism because they believe that the truth is objective and a matter of fact. Basically, that truth is just...truth.

As part of the scholars' homework, we read a short story called A Letter to God. It was about a man named Lencho who lived on a farm in the middle of a valley. He had planted a field of corn, and was in need of a rainfall. When dark clouds finally came over the field, it turned out to be a hailstorm which destroyed all of his crops. He was very upset that all of his work had been for nothing. So he wrote a letter to God, asking for 100 pesos to resow the field. He then went into town and dropped the letter into the mailbox.

The postmaster saw this letter and, amazed at the faith of the man, was able to collect 70 pesos which he put into an envelope and addressed to Lencho.

The following Sunday Lencho came to ask if there was a letter for him. When the postman gave him the envelope he was not surprised to see the bills but became angry when he saw that it was not the full amount he asked for. He immediately wrote a new letter and dropped it into the mailbox. The postmaster instantly went to open it. It said:

"God: of the money that I asked for, only seventy pesos reached me. Send me the rest, since I need it very much. But don't send it to me through the mail, because the post-office employees are a bunch of crooks. Lencho"

We decided that the themes of the story were:

1) Prejudice

2) Gratitude

3) Faith

We said that faith seemed like the main theme. Also there was a variation in how we felt after reading the story. Some felt happy, sad, humoured, and confused. Finally, we asked the question, "Can you be blinded by faith?"

What is the Meaning of Life?

Posted by our Chronicler, Jaron B.

Is the meaning of life to prepare us for life in heaven and to behold God in a second life in heaven? Or is it to find our full potential?  Or both?

Well without God there is no purpose for life.  But we all have purpose in life!  Some think the purpose is to be happy.  Happiness can be realizing that you are unique and amazing and lovely!

 

 

 

 

We all decided that this was NOT the meaning of life:

 

 

 

Life comes with lots of choices, responsibility, and decisions.

 

We also agreed that we find meaning when we "detect" our mission.  We disagreed with this quote as we felt that we do not "create" our mission - God does that.

 

 

 

 

 

We also asked "Are Happiness and Meaning the same thing?"

 

We discussed the different meanings for the following terms:

 

Deist (everyone in our group is a deist):  someone who believes that a Supreme Being created the world and left it alone.

 

Theist:  someone who believes in a Being Who exists beyond or outside the natural world, yet Who is able to be involved in the course of human events.

 

Agnostic:  someone who believes that we can never attain adequate answers to profound questions such as the existence of God or the meaning of life.

 

Atheist:  someone who believes that there is no such thing as God.

 

Nihilist:  someone who does not believe that life is meaningful at all.

 

One of our philosophers for the day was St. Thomas Aquinas

 

 

            1225-1274

•      Medieval Italian philosopher and Dominican priest

•      Famously illustrated with the church in one hand and Aristotle’s writings in the other

•      His views were often attacked in his lifetime but soon came to dominate Catholic philosophy

•      Canonized in 1323 and made Angelic Doctor in 1567

•      His greatest work was the Summa Theologica (summary of theology)

•      He believed that our essence is what we really are and existence is what we do throughout our life

 

Our second philosopher for the day was Jean-Paul Sartre

 

 

 

            1905-1980

•      20^th century French philosopher

•      One of the most famous atheist philosophers  - was an existentialist

•      He believed that free choice is the defining characteristic of human existence

•      He did not agree that God is needed to make human life meaningful.

•      He turned Aquinas’argument upside down:  he asserted that human existence precedes human essence

•      He thought that self-creation is what makes humans responsible for the way they live their lives

 

This is my last Chronicle!

 

 



What is Suffering?

Posted by our Chronicler, Jaron B.

Is suffering something we physically feel such as pain or is it something that we feel mentally, or spiritually?

 

Well let’s break it down with Socrates' four causes that we learned about a couple of weeks ago.

1. Formal:  What is it?

 2. Material: What's it made of?

3. Efficient:  Where did it come from?  Who made it?

4. Final:  What purpose does it serve?

Let’s start, so what is suffering? The definition of suffering is bad or unnecessary and unpleasant.

What is it made of what’s in it, or what is the content of it? Well suffering is something that we feel when were hurt in a couple different areas physical, mental, spiritual, or emotional.

Where did it come from? Who made it? Well, some people think God made suffering for all the reasons above.  Many of us agreed that God did not create suffering but allows it.  We create our own suffering.  When we hurt others, we hurt ourselves in the process.

What is it for? Some think it is to bring us closer to God, it makes us stronger and is what makes us who we are in this present moment.  It makes us strive to do better.

So the question becomes:  "How can you believe in a loving God with all the suffering that there is in the world?" Some people say the following.

If God is all-powerful, He could do something to prevent or end suffering.

If God is all-loving, He would want to prevent or end suffering.

There is a tremendous amount of suffering in the world.

Therefore, God either is not all-loving or not all-powerful.

Of course, as we are theists (people who believe in a Being Who exists beyond or outside the natural world, yet who is able to be involved in the course of human events), we do not agree with these statements. We acknowledge that God is all-loving and all-powerful and that he allows suffering in the world and makes all things good.

There are those who are deists so believe that God created all things but then left it alone.  They do not believe that God has a plan for us or interacts with us in any way.

Viktor Frankl, concentration camp survivor, once said "Suffering ceases to be suffering at the moment it finds meaning, such as the meaning of sacrifice."

This week's philosopher was St. Augustine.  He had a powerful conversion later in his life through the prayers of his mother, St. Monica, was a prolific writer and was eventually named Doctor of the Church.  He believed in the perfect connection between faith and reason.

What is Art?

Posted by our Chronicler, Jaron B.

We talked about what art is. So what is art? Is it a way of showing feeling, expressing yourself, or just for the sake of doing it. 

Look at the object below.

Is that art?  It looks like art, don’t you think? Aristotle, a famous Greek philosopher agrees that anything that represents something is art. He came up with the idea that if it represents something than it is art.

Aristotle

• Philosopher from Ancient Greece  469-399 BC
• Student of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great
• He and Plato were great friends despite their disagreements
• Aristotle was interested in the physical world and focused on scientific study
• He promoted the representationalist view of art in which art imitates nature
• He wasn’t an artist but wrote about art in Poetics

Friedrich Nietzsche

Friedrich Nietzsche was a German philosopher but he disagreed with Aristotle's representationalist theory.  He felt that art was meta-physical (beyond the physical) and should go beyond the literal representation of the world around us. He thought that tragic myths are art.  His theory is that experiencing unhappiness is good for humans and he thought that it forces us to have courage and strive toward greater accomplishments.  He is also famous for saying "God is Dead".

                                                      We thought this was funny!