Right Wrong And Science

Solving the problem of the negative impact of science and technology on society and the environment is indeed the greatest challenge of our time. To date, this challenge has been taken up by few professional philosophers of science, making this volume a welcome contribution to the general debate. Agazzi’s treatment involves viewing modern science and technology as each constituting systems. Against the background of this approach, he provides a penetrating analysis of science, technology and ethics, and their interrelations. Agazzi sees the solution to the problem as lying in the moral sphere and including a multilateral assumption of responsibility on the part of decision makers both within and outside of science.

Sam Harris dismantles the most common justification for religious faith--that a moral system cannot be based on science.

Where is the line between instinct and free will in humans? How far can technology and medicine go to manipulate the brain? With every new discovery about the human mind, more and more questions emerge about the boundaries of consciousness, responsibility, and how far neuroscience research can go. The fledgling field of neuroethics has sought answers to these questions since the first formal neuroethics conference was held in 2002. This groundbreaking volume collects the expert and authoritative writings published since then that have laid the groundwork for this rapidly expanding debate. Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science traverses the breadth of neuroethics, exploring six broad areas--including free will, moral responsibility, and legal responsibility; psychopharmacology; and brain injury and brain death--in thirty provocative articles. The scientific and ethical consequences of neuroscience research and technology are plumbed by leading thinkers and scientists, from Antonio Damasio's "The Neural Basics of Social Behavior: Ethical Implications" to "Monitoring and Manipulating Brain Function" by Martha J. Farah and Paul Root Wolpe. These and other in-depth chapters articulate the thought-provoking questions that emerge with every new scientific discovery and propose solutions that mediate between the freedom of scientific endeavor and the boundaries of ethical responsibility. As science races toward a future that is marked by startling new possibilities for our bodies and minds, Defining Right and Wrong in Brain Science is the definitive assessment of the ethical criteria guiding neuroscientists today.

A lively and entertaining guide to ethics in a technological age. Most people have a strong sense of right and wrong, and they aren't shy about expressing their opinions. But when we take a polarizing stand on something we regard as an eternal truth, we often forget that ethics evolve over time. Many shifts in the right versus wrong pendulum are driven by advances in technology. Our great-grandparents might be shocked by in vitro fertilization; our great-grandchildren might be shocked by the messiness of pregnancy, childbirth, and unedited genes. In Right/Wrong, Juan Enriquez reflects on what happens to our ethics as technology makes the once unimaginable a commonplace occurrence.

How do we formulate a coherent moral code in a world without religion? How can we show natural ideas like 'moral relativism' and 'egoism' to be irrational? Moreover, how can we create a genuinely scientific and rational theory of morality which, so far, has evaded academics? Rational Morality sets out to answer these questions by presenting a new form of ethics for the Brian Cox and Richard Dawkins generation. In this passionate, thought-provoking and often radical thesis, Robert Johnson presents both a refreshing theory of morality based on science and a guide to the practical consequences of what a truly rational concept of morality involves.

Why efforts to create a scientific basis of morality are neither scientific nor moral In this illuminating book, James Davison Hunter and Paul Nedelisky trace the origins and development of the centuries-long, passionate, but ultimately failed quest to discover a scientific foundation for morality. The "new moral science" led by such figures as E. O. Wilson, Patricia Churchland, Sam Harris, Jonathan Haidt, and Joshua Greene is only the newest manifestation of that quest. Though claims for its accomplishments are often wildly exaggerated, this new iteration has been no more successful than its predecessors. But rather than giving up in the face of this failure, the new moral science has taken a surprising turn. Whereas earlier efforts sought to demonstrate what is right and wrong, the new moral scientists have concluded, ironically, that right and wrong don't actually exist. Their (perhaps unwitting) moral nihilism turns the science of morality into a social engineering project. If there is nothing moral for science to discover, the science of morality becomes, at best, a feeble program to achieve arbitrary societal goals. Concise and rigorously argued, Science and the Good is a definitive critique of a would-be science that has gained extraordinary influence in public discourse today and an exposé of that project's darker turn.

When the Earth Was Flat tells the fascinating story behind scientific theories we once believed to be true, and shows how the way we view the world, and the way we think the world works, has changed completely throughout history.

Doing the Right Thing: Ethics in Science by the Editors of Scientific American Most of us have probably had those discussions, either in a classroom setting or otherwise, where a hypothetical situation is given and you're asked to choose between two or more unsatisfying options. If you follow option A, five people die; if you follow option B, one person dies. What do you do? Option B looks like the lesser of the evils, but then there's a wrinkle. Option B requires you to actively murder the one person to save five. Now what do you do? Making ethical decisions involves more than listening to an inner moral compass, a feeling in the gut of what's right and wrong; and questions of ethics in science are becoming increasingly complex, especially as technology encroaches upon even our most private cellular spaces. In this eBook, Doing the Right Thing: Ethics in Science, we cover a wide range of areas in science and medicine where complicated ethical questions come to bear, beginning with the first section, "Genomics." In "Are Personal Genome Scans Medically Useless," Sally Lehrman examines the value, or lack thereof, in the information obtained from direct-to-consumer genotyping tests, a field that exploded in the '00s. The middle sections are devoted to ethics in research, where informed—and ethically sound—choices are the basis of many scientific studies. Sections 2, 3 and 4 analyze the challenges unique to three areas, respectively: medical, pharmaceutical and basic research. Medical studies often reveal more information than researchers are looking for, and two articles, "The Ethics of Scan and Tell" and "Reporting Unrelated Findings in Study Subjects," examine questions of responsibility toward study subjects. Later, Charles Seife ferrets out doctors' financial ties to pharmaceutical companies in "Is Drug Research Trustworthy?" and Katherine Harmon calculates "The Cost of Misconduct" to the taxpayer. Finally Section 6, "Ethics and the Mind," analyzes the process of how we resolve moral conflicts when we make decisions. The interaction between reasoning and emotion is poorly understood, as seen in both "Anguish and Ethics" and "When Morality Is Hard to Like," but studies show that the emotional and memory regions of the brain are more active when confronted with difficult moral questions. These decisions are usually made after great inner struggle – think again of option B. What would you do?