Transcript May 28
Announcements Changes in paper due dates (already announced by email): Drafts (for those seeking writing credit) are due Friday, May 29th. Final version of paper is due at start of final exam, June 10. Our last meeting (lecture) is June 4th. We’ll wrap things up and engage in review. The last section meeting is June 5th. Science and ethics Can social beliefs and values impact “good” science, or is any science that is so impacted “bad” science (Gould)? The treatment of non-human primates Scientific theories about differences between human groups Scientific “integrity” and social input Ethical standards for studying human subjects Can social context inform (good?) science S.J. Gould, “Wide Hats and Narrow Minds” and “Women’s Brains” 19th century anthropology The hypothesis: intelligence is caused by brain size (larger is better). There are differences between races and sexes in intelligence – and differences in brain size The basic differences in intelligence assumed by anthropologists were widely assumed in the relevant historical and social context. Can social context inform (good?) science Gould: “If we laugh with derision, we will never understand…” Good science? Good science can be informed by social beliefs Broca’s impeccable numbers But at least in one case, he is guilty of circular reasoning Gould: “I do not regard as empty rhetoric the claim that women’s battles are for all of us.” Can social context inform (good?) science Recall from the beginning of the course: The norm of the autonomy of science and its roots in the Scientific Revolution How it is reflected in scientists’ reactions to “Creation Science” and “ID” And how it is reflected in the reading from the Union of Concerned Scientists (“Scientific Integrity” Can social context inform (good?) science Two other entrenched norms: Knowledge is a good for its own sake and Science is “value free” How does each norm (including that of the autonomy of science) fare in light of research such as that Gould documents? Can social context inform (good?) science The autonomy of science Science should not be interfered with or challenged on the basis of social and/or political views UCS: certainly at risk when evidence of global warming was dismissed, NASA couldn’t mention The Big Bang When education boards (e.g., in Texas) sought to ban the teaching of evolution and/or present it as “just a theory” and/or teach ID as an “alternative scientific theory” Can social context inform (good?) science Knowledge as a good in its own sake Three crucial debates: The development of the atomic bomb Oppenheimer in response to critiques of scientists’ work to develop it: “The reason we did this job is that it could be done. If you’re a scientist you cannot refuse to undertake such research. If you’re a scientists, there is an organic necessity to find out what knowledge you can and turn that knowledge over to mankind to use by its [mankind’s] own lights and values.” Can social context inform (good?) science Knowledge as a good in its own sake Three crucial debates: Recombinant DNA techniques (1977) Self-imposed world-wide moratorium on the use of the techniques until further study Short term benefits: create artificially-designed versions of insulin; create pest-resistant agricultural products; Short term risks: Creating a pathogen that escapes labs; simplicity of the techniques that can be mimicked by those interested in inflicting harm. Can social context inform (good?) science Recombinant DNA techniques (1977) Long term harms: playing evolution and creating entirely new species without being able to predict the evolutionary consequences Chargaff: “Knowledge must be combined with wisdom. … “Future generations will curse us [for this]. Can social context inform (good?) science From The Liberal Art of Science (AAAS) “The teaching of science must include the interplay between science and the intellectual and cultural traditions within which it is firmly embedded. Science has a history that can demonstrate the relationship between science and the wider world of ideas, and can illuminate contemporary issues.” Can social context inform (good?) science From The Liberal Art of Science (AAAS) “Liberal education in the sciences must provide students with linkages to the real world by exploring the values inherent in science and technology, by examining the institutions that set the directions for science and technology, and by stressing the choices scientists, citizens, and governments make about science in human lives.” How social context can inform (good?) science Divisions in cognitive authority and cognitive labor between scientists and citizens Historical relationships between scientists and citizens Current scientific illiteracy among citizens What group or which groups can be entrusted with understanding the social and ethical implications of scientific research? Citizens? Scientists? Politicians/governments? How social context can inform (good?) science Contemporary lessons? In addition to the need for reflexivity on the part of scientists in terms of the role of auxiliary assumptions, theory-laden observations, bodies of theory, paradigms Such influence is not absolute and science itself can serve as a corrective Gould himself uses science to critique 19th century science How social context can inform (good?) science Contemporary lessons? Plus then contemporary scientific critics: John Stuart Mill, “On the Subjection of Women” The only way we could demonstrate that women are inferior is to provide them with an equal playing field and see that they fail We have not given women an equal playing field so we can’t confirm that they are inferior I suspect that the resistance to the social experiment is that it would fail and a social revolution would occur… How social context can inform (good?) science Contemporary lessons? In addition to the need for reflexivity on the part of scientists in terms of the role of auxiliary assumptions, theory-laden observations, bodies of theory, paradigms Such influence is not absolute and science itself can serve as a corrective Scientists such as Mill, Wallace, Manrouvier, and Gould identify the problems with scientific evidence, hypotheses and theories Ethics and science The case of “Genie” The scientific questions: Are humans born with an innate capacity for language (syntax) or is behaviorism correct? Yes, they are so equipped: Noam Chomsky (Linguistics at Harvard, 1950s and 60s) If so, is there a “critical window” for language acquisition, after a child has passed through it without language it becomes difficult or impossible to acquire one? Yes, there is a critical window (1960s) A child’s ability to acquire language is peak between birth and 7, and then declines Ethics and science The case of “Genie,” a “natural experiment”: Scientific questions: Deprived of language through puberty, can she nevertheless be taught and acquire language? The players: “Genie” and the team of scientists and medical doctors who work with/live with/treat her What ethical issues emerge in the study/treatment of Genie? How should human and/or any other cognitively aware animal be treated? Is knowledge a good for its own sake? Should ethics limit/shape scientific research?