Arkouda @ Arkouda @lemmy.ca

No one could ever hate me more than I hate myself, so save your self some t

---

Read more

Posts

22

Comments

1,418

Joined

1 yr. ago

Why do you think the context of the testing doesn't matter?

Scientific study is by nature unethical because one must do unethical things in it's pursuit. We have ethical frameworks around Scientific Study for a reason, and it isn't because it was doing fine without those frameworks.

Can you tell me what goes in to the Science of birdsong? I am unfamiliar with the field and expect you to be able to give me a detailed response on what goes in to it as it is your example.

You are missing the point and I won't restate what was already stated explicitly.

You could’ve said “science is unethical by nature”, or “science is, by nature, unethical”, with commas. Those would be well formulated sentences, which would be easier to read and make sense of.

You understood exactly what I meant.

About the questions: do you oppose all ethical guidelines in science? Are there any you’re fond of? Or should science be completely unimpeded, regardless of who it damages, or what purpose it serves? Can you give any examples?

I don't oppose ethical guidelines because they are required to keep Scientific Study in check. I never stated that Science did not need ethical frameworks, I said they are detrimental to Scientific Study. Ethical frameworks hold back Study because of the damage it can do. That doesn't mean progress is not slowed because of those safe guards.

If Scientific study is ethical, why do we require ethical frame works to keep Scientific study from being unethical?

As I said, very questionable.

It is only questionable because of the numerous assumptions you made about me as a person, followed by engaging me in bad faith because of those assumptions.

I think I’ve keyed into your phrasing, particularly “precursor”, in my answer. If “premoral behaviour” is a step in developing morality, does that make it a precursor?

Yes.

What happens between premoral behaviour and morality that develops it?

Mysticism and spirituality is what is between "premoral behavior" and "morality".

I would have assumed that reward/punishment behaviours between humans socially based on those “premoral” behaviours I described would have led to more nuanced moral systems that would have then been written into religious and spiritual practices.

What do you think happens between premorality and morality?

We had spiritual practices before written word. These were kept through oral histories.

I see the path to the idea of morality like this:

Once a species begins to show "premoral behaviors" (Things like demonstration of altruism to other members of the species) overtime these behaviors ingrain into that specific population of the species. However, these animals will still go against those behaviors and will require as you said a "reward/punishment" system. This helps to reinforce those behaviors within that specific group.

This will work for a few dozen people, but even then there would be dissent and disagreement over what is and isn't acceptable leading to violations of rules in place. The consequence is violence.

What I believe was needed to get past this point and have larger groups of humans work together was an idea that being "good" was "bigger than us". Spirituality is that step from "rules" to "morally correct". Without the idea of something bigger making the rules and declaring actions "good", we are simply making rules that other agree and disagree with that require enforcement through violence.

Which isn't to say that Religion isn't a history of violence and disagreement, but there is a difference between "Rule enforced by Man" and "Rule enforced by an all powerful being" when trying to get a group of people to act "appropriately" in precivilization humans. "I can kill you if I disagree, but this "God" thing sounds like I don't want a piece of that".

does a higher power give us our morals?

No. All evidence suggest there is no God, no afterlife, and nothing special about our species beyond becoming smart enough to kill ourselves.

I know what ethical means. Do you know what asinine means?

I never said that. You have a reach like Mr. Tickle.

What about my statement is badly formulated? If it is questionable, where are your questions?

When you assume you make an ass out of you and me.

its just hard to understand how something so stupid can be said

I don't care what you believe because you have demonstrated 0 good faith since start.

You can go away now.

I understand the history of Science which is why I made my OP.

While I agree it does not invalidate the study because it is one of the gold standards, it is disingenuous to say that the information provided to gain informed consent in a double blind study has no impact on that study.

This is incredibly ignorant, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Have you ever asked a Scientist how they feel about the impacts of ethical frameworks on their study?

How can we have a proper double blind study if we are forced to tell the participants information that could impact the results of the study in order to gain informed consent?

Without ethics in Science we have a detailed understanding of our anatomy, the ability to transplant organs, numerous life saving medications, space travel, understanding of the human mind, etc.

Fact of the matter is when "ethics" are imposed on Scientific study, Scientific study is hindered, so Scientific study cannot be ethical if it is to be successful.

Is the sentence hard to understand?

It doesn’t have to be spiritual or religious!

But historically, according to all available evidence, it was spiritualism and religion that promoted these behaviors in a more widespread way leading to larger groups of people coexisting.

The behavior you are referencing is seen in other species and known as "premoral behavior". I do not deny that those behaviors benefit the group, what I am saying is it is not a demonstration of morality. It is however the first step into developing morality.

Not at all what I said, which is why I said earlier I sincerely do not believe you understand English well enough to continue having this conversation.

Take care