Quote:
Science could use religion? Religions provide moral codes. Science without morals?
Unconsciousable Nazi experimentation
Cloning humans for body parts
Nuclear testing destroying the earth
Science without morals places the pursuit of knowledge itself as a religion rather than care for the race.
|
I think you misunderstood my post a bit Yorick.I wasnt trying to say one was more valid or true than the other. Just that one is somewhat more pallitable than the other because of its representatives. I havent heard of anybody going to war or killing people because of gravity or the theory of relativity.
Now for the quoted stuff. I fully believe that religeous moral dogma has NO place in scientific discovery.Science should be the pursuit of knowledge for no other reason than simply to know and see if things can be done.It should be based on factual and rational obsevation , NOT subjective feelings and predjudices. History has shown that religeon stands in the way of science. In the dark ages when everyone thought that the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth the scientists who claimed otherwise like copernicus and gallileo, were put to death for heresy by the church. Nazi experiments , while they were terrible had to have yielded some new discoverys. I dont have any numbers or names ,but thousands of human experiments couldnt have been a total waste. Cloneing will be the treatment of the future as long as the religeious fanatics keep out of it. If you can clone a sheep , why not a human?? Why are people diffrent from sheep?Personaly if I needed a heart transplant , I would preffer one that was cloned from my own cells instead of one out of a dead person.