Re: The Objectivity of Science

15. Jim McGinn
Dec 19, 12:26 pm show options

Newsgroups: sci.bio.evolution
From: "Jim McGinn" <jimmcg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> - Find messages by this
author
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 12:26:44 -0500 (EST)
Local: Mon, Dec 19 2005 12:26 pm
Subject: Re: The Objectivity of Science
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse


<whitesic...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message


news:do5a9l$17dq$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


> IOW, scientists are human too.


> Jim


> In a nutshell...yes. And because of that they have the potential to
> cause great harm and death.



I think there's another possibility that we have to consider. Maybe a
scientifically accurate understanding of evolutionary theory--in and of

itself--is the thing that has potential to cause great harm and death,
and
"incompetent" scientists with their scientifically erroneous but
socially
comforting version of evolutionary theory are the only things staving
off a
pandora's release of a scientifically accurate but socially poisonous
understanding of evolutionary theory. (I say this with full knowledge
of my
own complicity in spreading the "poison.")

Sorry to always be the contrarian.


Jim

Ragland:
I don't think a scientifically accurate understanding of evolutionary
theory--in and of itself--is the thing that has potential to cause
great harm and death. Afterall, thousands of years before Darwin people
were basically (in terms of DNA) the way they are today. They caused
great harm and death back then without any necessary science of
Darwin/evolutionary biology. In other words, there is a difference
between lacing and tying one's shoes and describing how one's shoes are
laced and tied. Darwin and evolutionary biology are "value free" on a
scientific basis; it doesn't have the potential to cause great harm and
death. It merely describes the "process". On the other hand, just
"lacing and tying one's shoes" does have the potential to cause great
harm and death. We're not dealing with a scientific descriptive process
but the "thing" which Darwin and evolutionary biology describes. Yes,
this is philosophical but I think the difference here is important so
as not to come to any erroneous assumptions Darwin/evolutionary biology
have the potential to cause great harm and death. A scientifically
accurate understanding of evolutionary theory is irrelevant in whether
scientists are capable of great harm and death. It provides a basis for
an understanding of the potential/actuality of the species causing
great harm and death but the species, with or without this
understanding, would nevertheless engage in such harm and death.

You write, "Incompetent" scientists with their scientifically erroneous
but socially
comforting version of evolutionary theory are the only things staving
off a
pandora's release of a scientifically accurate but socially poisonous
understanding of evolutionary theory." I won't mince words here Mr.
McGinn. If you've read some of my postings you are aware we fall on the
opposite ends of the spectrum on this issue. However, as I stated
evolutionary theory is a describtive process which does provide some
understanding for what we as a species do but it is not necessary or
even important as a catalyst for the species causing great harm and
death.

Finally, as it pertains to scientists having the potential to cause
great harm and death this flows out of evolutionary mechanisms but it
is not really related to science. The Third Reich made no signifigant
scientific contributions. Indeed, the world's greatest physicist was
driven out of Germany and his residence ransacked. Many other top
scientists emigrated. The laboratory of Auschwitz, Dachau, etc. didn't
bore any scientific fruit. I'm less familiar with Imperial Japan but
nothing scientific came out of there I'm aware of.

You state, "I say this with full knowledge of my own complicity in
spreading the "poison." You're hardly alone Mr. McGinn but thank you
for acknowledging such. As far as, "Sorry to always be the contrarian"
I doubt that.

Michael Ragland


.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast