Science without morals and ethics leads to amazing developments, but often misguided or twisted understanding, and unbridled human suffering.
It’s not enough to be a good scientist, one must also be a good person. The people involved with Epstein are UNREPENTANTLY evil. These are not people who are in the “grey” like a leper who was an untouchable or a murderer who killed unintentionally and regrets it their whole life.
A true scientist doesn’t need the law to tell them that someone is highly likely to be a monster when the evidence is mounting. Rather they would chase the evidence and do their best to make a decision based on the most logical outcome.
A good scientist who is also a good person must work to excise this toxicity from the scientific community.
Also, Budda and Jesus? A terrible bad faith argument, I can’t dignify that with anything other than dismissal
“Science without morals and ethics leads to amazing developments, but often misguided or twisted understanding, and unbridled human suffering.”
Exactly this. I see way too many scientists who may not be actively bad people, but they convince themselves that it’s possible to do science in an apolitical manner.
I believe that science is able to get as close to objectivity as is possible to achieve. However, individual scientists can never be objective, and the more they think of themselves in that way, the less objective the resulting science is.
Science without morals and ethics leads to amazing developments, but often misguided or twisted understanding, and unbridled human suffering.
It’s not enough to be a good scientist, one must also be a good person. The people involved with Epstein are UNREPENTANTLY evil. These are not people who are in the “grey” like a leper who was an untouchable or a murderer who killed unintentionally and regrets it their whole life. A true scientist doesn’t need the law to tell them that someone is highly likely to be a monster when the evidence is mounting. Rather they would chase the evidence and do their best to make a decision based on the most logical outcome.
A good scientist who is also a good person must work to excise this toxicity from the scientific community.
Also, Budda and Jesus? A terrible bad faith argument, I can’t dignify that with anything other than dismissal
Exactly this. I see way too many scientists who may not be actively bad people, but they convince themselves that it’s possible to do science in an apolitical manner.
I believe that science is able to get as close to objectivity as is possible to achieve. However, individual scientists can never be objective, and the more they think of themselves in that way, the less objective the resulting science is.