[MD] A Science of Morals

[Ian Glendinning]

Hi Mary,

That phrase was actually Ron's (I was agreeing too).

Though "is" is too strong ... or tautological ... to be much use.
For a Pirsigian everything "comprises" moral value (or quality)

That "fact" is clear ... what is not clear is how to help science (the
institutions and activities of scientists) overcome its denial of that
"fact".

Regards
Ian

On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Mary <marysonthego at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Ian,
>> > which brings us back to the idea that science is a moral value.
>
> Hello,
>
> I agree with this.  We do science based on our current belief system.  There
> was a time before relativity when we believed Newtonian mechanics was the be
> all end all of physics.  Physics was considered a dead-end science because
> we thought everything was already known or would be known shortly.  The
> clockwork Universe fitted in with the prevailing religious conceptions so
> well.  We do not do experiments about things we do not believe in beforehand
> because we do not believe there is any possibility of learning anything from
> them.
>
> In this way science is constrained by morals.  Morals map our direction of
> inquiry, and morals can limit our ability to clearly understand the
> ramifications of experimental results.
>
> Mary
>
> - The most important thing you will ever make is a realization.
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: moq_discuss-bounces at lists.moqtalk.org [mailto:moq_discuss-
>> bounces at lists.moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of John Carl
>> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 3:00 PM
>> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>> Subject: Re: [MD] A Science of Morals
>>
>> As usual Ron, you made me stop and really think.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 7:27 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Ian,
>> > which brings us back to the idea that science is a moral value.
>> >
>> >
>> When it comes down to my own personal experience, the most moral people
>> I
>> know are science-oriented and the least moral are religion-oriented.
>>
>> The science-oriented are kidlike and playful and full of wonder and
>> easily
>> taken out of themselves by some intellectual pursuit or another.  Not
>> all,
>> maybe.  But most that I can think of.
>>
>> I've known some good religious people, but I've known a lot of bastards
>> and
>> pedophiles and control freaks too.  More than seems statistically
>> likely.
>>  Maybe that's because I went to a religious boarding school and got
>> more
>> exposure to that narrow population, but I heard a guy on the radio once
>> who
>> had called in to a talk show that was asking people about deadbeats,
>> and
>> they guy said by far the worse were clergy, of all kinds.  They had a
>> sort
>> of "you'll get paid when it's the lord's will" attitude that made it
>> real
>> tough to get money out of them.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > I believe the charge that it is culturally dominated by objectivism
>> > is dissolving,
>> > -Ron
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I think that the hard-line, "there's no such thing as values" stance
>> has
>> been rotting for sometime and I do think Harris is at least a positive
>> sign
>> of that rot.
>>
>>
>> Yah know, Royce put science as the highest of human moral endeavors.
>>
>>
>> John the shameless plugger
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>