Abstract
IN the Scientific Monthly of October, Prof. E. G. Conklin discusses the question: “Does science afford a basis for ethics? The highest level of human development, he urges, is attained when purpose and freedom, joined to social emotions, training and habits, shape behaviour not only for personal but also for social satisfactions. Society, no less than the individual, is seeking satisfactions, and when all these things combine, we have what we call ethics, or the science of right conduct. Science, he considers, affords a sound basis for ethitcs in spite of the fact that it is regarded as natural rather than supernatural in origin and development. With increasing knowledge of Nature and man, many codes have been shown to be unreasonable and unethical, and science has helped to replace them by more rational and humane ones. Science is knowledge of Nature and of man, and ethics being dependent on such knowledge it is impossible to divorce ethics from science. Science did not create Nature or man or ethics, and cannot be held responsible for their imperfections. It is as absurd to attribute human greed, aggression, hate and war to science as it would be to hold it responsible for hurricanes, earthquakes or pestilences. Because science regards ethics as a natural phenomena, it can hope to determine the causes of unethical behaviour and attempt to improve ethics by controlling these causes.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Science and Ethics. Nature 144, 935 (1939). https://doi.org/10.1038/144935b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/144935b0