scientists need to GET OVER IT

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Ack! Ya got me! [stagger, stagger . . . thud]



Hoot! HOOT! HOOT! Hoot! HOOT! HOOT! Hoot! HOOT! HOOT! Hoot! HOOT! HOOT!

Attention! Attention! Gender Discrmination Alert! Gender Discrmination Alert! Gender Discrmination Alert!

Hoot! HOOT! HOOT! Hoot! HOOT! HOOT! Hoot! HOOT! HOOT! Hoot! HOOT! HOOT!

It isnot gender discrimination as all woman who want health babies will not endrager then in working in dangerous jobs. Most woman who work with x-ray machine in hospital are alway pass child bearing age.

[Az]

It isnot gender discrimination as all woman who want health babies will not endrager then in working in dangerous jobs. Most woman who work with x-ray machine in hospital are alway pass child bearing age.

I suggest placing Roentgen devices in Kitchens to liberate all women from CBH's wrath.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Azazel

It isnot gender discrimination as all woman who want health babies will not endrager then in working in dangerous jobs. Most woman who work with x-ray machine in hospital are alway pass child bearing age.

I suggest placing Roentgen devices in Kitchens to liberate all women from CBH's wrath.

Are you bias. First all woman want to have childern at one time or other. X-ray can also make than woman barren unable to have childern. Than it than young woman want to work with x-ray machine must sign a paper stateing she willnot sue the hospital it she is make barren by x-ray radiation or childern are born defectives.

[Az]

1) First, not all women want to have children (sadly).
2) People take all sorts of jobs, some of them include health risks, also, sadly. I don't think that men are expendable and can be exposed to radiation any more than women.

[Last Conformist]

Damnable helll! I misclicked and placed CBH on my buddy list! How do I get rid of him`?

[Odin]

I am sick of radiation paranoia keeping us from building nuclear power plants. Three-Mile Island released a miniscule amout of radiation, not enogh to make a difference against natural sources, yet people think it was was some horrible disaster. Most radiation we take is from natural sources (radon, potassium-40, and carbon 14).

[Last Conformist]

Don't forget that you can considerably reduce the amount of radiation you take from radon by avoiding going indoors. Think of your descendants and those radon-trapping houses!

[Elok]

Originally posted by Agathon
I've actually taught bioethics and ethics in science and I sympathize with Kuci.

The problem is not that there isn't a need for ethics in science, but that the vast majority of what gets discussed is silly and often motivated by religious impulses. Despite being debunked year after year some idiots insist on talking about "playing God" and other such idiocies.

If it is done properly it can be both useful and interesting for scientists.

The last time I taught this stuff, we spent a lot of time talking about problems with the environment and things like tradable pollution permits and the tragedy of the commons. We also talked about how markets tend to undervalue things like national parks, and the effects of IT and genetic testing on individual privacy.

This is all interesting stuff, but it tends to get overshadowed by the religious twits.

"I approve of ethical considerations in science. Just as long as they're MY ethics."

I think I understand what you're saying, but by "properly" don't you just mean, "so long as they wind up agreeing with me?" It's not like ethics is an empirical science, right? Geez, I hope you weren't implying that it was...

[Agathon]

I think I understand what you're saying, but by "properly" don't you just mean, "so long as they wind up agreeing with me?" It's not like ethics is an empirical science, right? Geez, I hope you weren't implying that it was..

No. I mean attempts to smuggle religious belief into ethical discussions. The problem with that is that it is useless. Not everyone is religious, and different religions have different principles. Religion is simply irrelevant to this discipline.

What works is finding shared moral principles and not worrying about their provenance (religious or otherwise). What works is dismissing silly appeals to religion like the "playing God" arguments.

There are many ethical problems that science and technology have created and are creating. The problem of genetic privacy is one of them. That is a serious issue. Similarly, tradable pollution permits are a serious issue, which could prove to be a major benefit to the environment. Trying to work out guidelines for the testing of new drugs is a serious issue.

These are all things about which reasonable people can come to some agreement based on critical reflection over shared values. They are also important practical problems that the human race is confronted with.

On the other hand...

Caring about whether genetic manipulation of fetuses to give children blue eyes is "playing God" is not a serious issue. Worrying about whether trees have feelings is not a serious issue. "Spaceship Earth" is not a serious issue.

And the right does not by any means have a monopoly on such idiocy.

[Kuciwalker]

Agathon

The idiotic, inane fears of the clueless masses

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by Ramo
Ethics are a vital part of science. For exhibit a, see Edward teller.

Yeah. Not surprisingly many scientists also publish various books about ethics. After all they have knowledge we regular people don't have when talking about certain issues like gene-debates and so on.

[Agathon]

Not surprisingly many scientists also publish various books about ethics.

A lot of them are terrible. While it's true that many ethicists are terrible at science, the opposite is also the case.

I've thought of writing an ethics book as I can't stand most of the ones I've used.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dissident
Hell, they can't even prove radiation causes cancer. Although we all suspect it does.

Nothing is ever proved in science.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Agathon
A lot of them are terrible.

Ethics are clearly relative.

[:) Smiley]

Just going to show that scientists know enough about ethics; its the ethicists who need to learn more science.