Scribd
Upload
82 views2 pages

Sts

1) Lewis Wolpert argued that science is value-free and objective, focusing only on facts without taking moral stances. It can discover truths without passing judgment. 2) Wolpert saw a serious problem in conflating science and technology, as applying scientific discoveries in technology can enable manipulation, pollution, and weapons that pose ethical issues. 3) Scientists have a distinct social responsibility compared to citizens due to their specialized knowledge, such as informing clients of biological weapons' implications or allowing public evaluation of research.

Uploaded by

MarkJimMalaga
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
82 views2 pages

Sts

1) Lewis Wolpert argued that science is value-free and objective, focusing only on facts without taking moral stances. It can discover truths without passing judgment. 2) Wolpert saw a serious problem in conflating science and technology, as applying scientific discoveries in technology can enable manipulation, pollution, and weapons that pose ethical issues. 3) Scientists have a distinct social responsibility compared to citizens due to their specialized knowledge, such as informing clients of biological weapons' implications or allowing public evaluation of research.

Uploaded by

MarkJimMalaga
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

1.

What did Lewis Wolpert mean when he stated that ’reliable scientific knowledge is value-free and has
no moral or ethical value?

What he meant by that phrase is that science is based on facts and it is involved in the way the
world aside from subjective matters of interpretations. It can also learn different facts without needing to
take any stands on values. It does not concern itself with any mundane debates about its matter of value.

2. The conflation of science and technology is considered as a serious problem according to Wolpert.
Although there is a huge difference between science and technology but whenever the science is applied
in the technology, the dangers and ethical issues emerges. The danger of application of science might
become a tools of manipulation, degradation or even a destruction. The biological or chemical attacks and
the industrial pollution can be considered as the hazard of the conflation of science and technology.

3. How is the social responsibility of scientist distinct from those ordinary citizens? Cite two specific
situations where this distinction become apparent.

The scientist’s social responsibility differs from those ordinary citizen comes from them having access to
the specialized knowledge on how the world works that is strictly limited to people who has higher
educational status while citizens support democratic society and the taking reasonably care of the rights
of the other.

Examples:

The scientists build some biological weapons, while building they behaved morally and attained the social
responsibility. Informing their client on the implications of these weapons.

The scientists accept tasks from the government and the public should be in a position to demand and
critically evaluate the evidence of their research.

4. How is Eugenics a classic example of the perversion of scientific knowledge?

It is considered as a perversion of science because the immorality of behaviour of the scientist. The
eugenic sterilization law becoming a mandatory leads to the atrocities of the doctors and others. It
becomes unethical since the ill-person was not given a chance to get an adequate treatment,
rehabilitation, and follow-ups that an institution could offer.

5. Why does Wolpert claim that all science is reductionist?

He believes that every single process in nature can be broken down into different components that can
be a way to be described scientifically. By looking to these components, the scientists can gain a better
understanding on the whole process. One of the example for this is the complexity of human brain, if the
scientists or researchers understands the underlying chemical reactions then they can explain intelligence
and all other human conditions.
6. Why is there a need to encourage ordinary citizens to learn more about science?

If we encourage the citizens to learn more about science, they can somehow understand the implications
of different research provided by scientists and other researchers and to critically evaluate the research
of the scientists. Also, the public or politicians can be capable of taking correct decisions with regards to
the science and its application and implication.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy