The big risk in practicing science is that you may not like the answer it provides. The previous administration, when faced with results it didn't like, decided to censor the results. I don't see how this makes any sense. How can a government make decisions and policy when the facts are hidden or discredited based on predetermined biases?
- Log in to post comments
More like this
A story in CIDRAP News by the always excellent science journalist Maryn McKenna provides food for thought:.
A flu vaccine manufacturer's decision not to build a US facility has highlighted the perpetual mismatch between flu-shot supply and demand--and the reality that the mismatch may undermine…
For as many benefits as the Internet and the web have brought us in the last two decades, there are also significant downsides. I could go into all the societal changes brought about by the proliferation of this new technology, not the least of which (to me, at least) is the newfound ability of…
Jonathan Adler, a specialist in environmental law at Case Western who contributes to the Volokh Conspiracy blog, has written a lengthy and thorough, if pretty critical, review of The Republican War on Science for the journal Regulation.
I am here posting a reply to Adler's review, but first, a…
Wow. Here's another inexcusable case of bad science journalism - one that clearly has political motives. This is the lede from a story by Amanda Carpenter in this morning's Washington Times:
President Obama's top science adviser has toyed with extreme measures of population control, even suggesting…
Yes, society can make ethical decisions without science. Best and current knowledge predates science and even with science society still can only work with the current state of knowledge and understanding.
That said, it has to be noted that the quality of ethical decision making cannot improve without science of some sort. And a lack of improvement, a failure to understanding the imperfection of the ethical decisions based current knowledge and/or a desire to improve, is, in its self, a lack of ethics.
Best and current knowledge is itself based on cruder forms of science.
One can make decisions of ethics without science; however, the choices resulting from such methods tend on balance to be less moral in consequences than those made with science helping.