Moralistic Fallacy - Effects On Science and Society

Effects On Science and Society

Sometimes basic scientific findings or interpretations are rejected, or their discovery or development or acknowledgement is opposed or restricted, through assertions of potential misuse or harmfulness.

In the late 1970s, Bernard Davis, in response to growing political and public calls to restrict basic research (versus applied research), amid criticisms of dangerous knowledge (versus dangerous applications), applied the term moralistic fallacy toward its present use.

(The term was used as early as 1957 to at least some if differing import.)

In natural science, the moralistic fallacy can result in rejection or suppression of basic science, whose goal is understanding the natural world, on account of its potential misuse in applied science, whose goal is the development of technology or technique. This blurs scientific assessment, discussed in natural sciences (like physics or biology), versus significance assessment, weighed in social sciences (like social psychology, sociology, and political science), or in behavioral sciences (like psychology).

Davis asserted that in basic science, the descriptive, explanatory, and thus predictive ability of information is primary, not its origin or its applications, since knowledge cannot be ensured against misuse, and misuse cannot falsify knowledge. Both misuse and prevention and suppression of scientific knowledge can have undesired or even undesirable effects. In the early 20th century, development of the basic science quantum physics enabled the atomic bomb through applied science in the mid 20th century. Without quantum physics, however, much technology of communications and imaging, by other applied science, could have been renounced.

Scientific theories with abundant research support can be discarded in public debates, where general agreement is central but can be utterly false. The obligation of basic scientists to inform the public, however, can be stymied by contrasting claims from others both rousing alarm and touting assurances of protecting the public. Davis had indicated that greater and clearer familiarization with the uses and limitations of science can more effectively prevent knowledge misuse or harm.

Natural science can help humans understand the natural world, but it cannot make policy, moral, or behavioral decisions. Questions involving values—what people should do—are more effectively addressed through discourse in social sciences, not by restriction of basic science. Misunderstanding of the potential of science, and misplaced expectations, have resulted in moral and decisionmaking impediments, but suppressing science is unlikely to resolve these dilemmas.

Read more about this topic:  Moralistic Fallacy

Famous quotes containing the words effects, science and/or society:

    Oh that my Pow’r to Saving were confin’d:
    Why am I forc’d, like Heav’n, against my mind,
    To make Examples of another Kind?
    Must I at length the Sword of Justice draw?
    Oh curst Effects of necessary Law!
    How ill my Fear they by my Mercy scan,
    Beware the Fury of a Patient Man.
    John Dryden (1631–1700)

    It is not too much to say that next after the passion to learn there is no quality so indispensable to the successful prosecution of science as imagination. Find me a people whose early medicine is not mixed up with magic and incantations, and I will find you a people devoid of all scientific ability.
    Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914)

    All mothers need instruction, nurturing, and an understanding mentor after the birth of a baby, but in this age of fast foods, fast tracks, and fast lanes, it doesn’t always happen. While we live in a society that provides recognition for just about every life event—from baptisms to bar mitzvahs, from wedding vows to funeral rites—the entry into parenting seems to be a solo flight, with nothing and no one to mark formally the new mom’s entry into motherhood.
    Sally Placksin (20th century)