Can The Science Help Us To Make Wise Ethical Judgements By Paul Kurtz Summary

A famous thought experiment in quantum physics is that of Schrödinger’s cat. In this experiment, a cat is placed in a box with poison that has a chance to either explode, killing the cat, or not explode, allowing the kitty to live. Although some would object, we ought to open the box to see if the cat is alive or not. Similarly, we should attempt to uncover reality instead of accepting the current dogma. In his article, “Can the Sciences Help Us to Make Wise Ethical Judgements?” Paul Kurtz argues that not only can science help through inquiry but it already plays an active role in shaping our moral conduct. According to him, ethical judgement and science meet somewhat halfway and although we cannot come up with a specific set of instructions

This perception results from a combination of personal experience and social integration. Kurtz argues that there are “two kinds of values within human experience [...] values rooted in unexamined feelings, faith, custom, or authority [...] and values that are influenced by cognition and informed by rational inquiry” (73). He reveals that one can base his values on either intangible beliefs, or on logical exploration, and suggests that the latter one is more correct. However, what is right or wrong is a matter of cultural interpretation, and what is wise today may not be wise tomorrow. Subsequently, it is the way we use scientific findings that matters more than what those findings actually are. In the cloning example, the only reason safety was considered an issue is because of the belief that we should not harm a human, given that we perceive our lives to be special. Even so, Galileo was persecuted and Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake for suggesting that the earth goes round the sun and not vice versa. This is common knowledge now, having had our notions evolve with science, but it does not change the way the two of them, along with many others, were treated for going against the doctrine of their time. This proves that science does influence the way we factually look at things (eventually) but that we still use it according to our deeply rooted beliefs, creating divisions and tensions amongst our own