You can not have science without ethics, they both need each other. I respect every culture and understand that trusting in a belief is completely normal and a strong and supportive way to keep going (you could still believe without faith), but without faith you could trust your facts way less. When it comes to believing in science (the religion of science) you cannot have faith. People end up being wrong about things all the time, but who you have faith in (speaking of God, etc.) never seems to be wrong. Its mental reality. With faith you can trust all you want and never have to worry about the one you trust being wrong. For example, I don’t have to worry about when the world ends because I have faith in God that I will go to heaven. When it comes to faith you choose the more ethical path. There are more people in the world who have faith in God etc. they are being ethical over choosing science. Therefor ethics is more important than science.
10 01010101 00100 01010010 01 01 00101 01 010 10 011101010101 10101 00 0 101 010100101 001110 11001010010101001011010110101 1 0100101 010 01 01 01 01 01 01 001 010101 11 010 1 0 010010 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0101 010 00100 01 0101 101 00 010 0101010 01010101 0010101001 010 0000 0 1010 101010 01
We have to be around to appreciate whatever scientific discoveries or advancements we make, Not to mention make them. In that regard ethics are more important than science. We can't kill for it. We can't hold people in captivity for it. There has to be a line.
We should be pursuing science to benefit our humanity, Not at the expense of it.
Science is equal to ethics because it is based on philosophical virtues. The most important thing to science is truth. Truth is also a virtue. Thus, science is also a religious philosophy as it is based off of the scientific method, created by a religious philosopher. To say that ethics are more important is inaccurate, but to say the opposite is also true.
Long term success is always more important than short term suffering. If ten woman and children must die in an experiment today to create a life giving medicine that will help us in the future, It isn’t much of a question whether or not killing those people off is the good idea. Obviously gross ethical violations need to be watched over to ensure the data collected is worth it.
I was raised on Judeo-Christian principles. Ethics, however, are subjective based on society. The objectivity lent by scientific observation is only limited by subjective morality. In some places for a very long time it was thought ethical to eat the dead. We know through scientific study that that practice is not healthy, and when exposed to that data cultures tend to shift.
Concrete data is more important than ethical tradition. Not every mean justifies that end, but concrete data should INFORM ethics. If it was ethical to own slaves based on no data and data was later found that suggested ethics should conform to a new ideal, things would change. Slavery would be outlawed.