Ethics is a Science (domain of knowledge)

[coberst]

Ethics is a Science (domain of knowledge)

When we think of ethics as a science (domain of knowledge) we can concentrate on learning the principles of ethics just as we would any other science. To be skilled in any science we must comprehend the fundamental principles of that science and we must learn how to utilize those principles in an objective manner.

Although ethics can be studied as a science it must also be studied as a matter of judgments made by humans under great sociocentric forces. Ethical principles must be applied in very complex situations in which we have only partial comprehension and are forced to make quick judgments.

What strategic elements can we rely on to help us in our effort to become sophisticated ethical agents? I think there are three such elements necessary for consideration when difficult ethical questions must be considered.
• Mastering ethical concepts and principles
• Distinguishing the science of ethics from other sciences or thinking
• Mastering the self when great ego, economic, and socio centric forces are in play

I think that at least some ethical principles are universal and to look for those principles I turn for guidance to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights established in 1948 by the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Here are a few principles laid out in the 30 articles of the declaration:

* All humans are equal in dignity and rights.
* All humans have the rights of life, liberty, and security.
* No human shall be enslaved.
* No human shall be tortured.
* All humans have a right to an adequate standard of living.
* All humans have a right to education.
* All humans have a right to peacefully assemble.
* All humans are equal under the law.

Many of these ideas come from “Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life” by Paul and Elder.

I think that we should study ethics both as a science and as a judgment made by humans under very difficult situations. What do you think about this matter?

[McCulloch]

Ethics is a Science (domain of knowledge)

I have never understood the word science to mean simply a domain of knowledge. There are domains of knowledge such as mathematics or poetry which are not sciences.

sci·ence (n.)

1. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
2. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
3. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

If you were to explore ethics as a science, what kinds of hypotheses would you test? What experiments would you perform? What predictions would you attempt to make?

[coberst]

McCullach says--"If you were to explore ethics as a science, what kinds of hypotheses would you test? What experiments would you perform? What predictions would you attempt to make?"


I would not study its methods of operation, I would probably perform no experiments and I guess I would not make any predictions. I would study its principles and concepts.

Webster says science is --a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study.

When I study chemistry I can study it as an occupation, as a history, as a domain of physics, as a domain of knowledge, etc.

When I study chemistry as a domain of knowledge I will study it by comprehending its principles and its concepts (maybe more).

When I study ethics as a domain of knowledge I will study it by comprehending its principles and its concepts (maybe more).

Whenever I study any department of systematized knowledge I will study it by learning its principles and its concepts (maybe more).

The hang-up comes because we use the word ‘science’ in a popular fashion that is not related to this meaning of ‘science’.

[McCulloch]

When I study chemistry I can study it as an occupation, as a history, as a domain of physics, as a domain of knowledge, etc.

Chemistry is a science. Its principles are determined by what is called the scientific method. The science of chemistry has a history. The science of chemistry has occupational and technical applications.

When I study chemistry as a domain of knowledge I will study it by comprehending its principles and its concepts (maybe more).

And those principles and concepts are scientifically testable. That is why chemistry is called a science.

When I study ethics as a domain of knowledge I will study it by comprehending its principles and its concepts (maybe more).

And those principles and concepts are not scientifically testable. That is why ethics is not a science.

The hang-up comes because we use the word ‘science’ in a popular fashion that is not related to this meaning of ‘science’.

So let's look at what science is:

[T]he essential characteristics of science are:

1. It is guided by natural law;
2. It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law;
3. It is testable against the empirical world;
4. Its conclusions are tentative, i.e., are not necessarily the final word; and
5. It is falsifiable.

Please demonstrate how the study of ethics fits into this meaning of the word science.

[coberst]

McCulloch

Like many words 'science' has more than one meaning also the word 'science' is often used as a short hand for 'natural science' and many people use this without comprehending that there is more than one meanig.

I think your post indicates that you do not accept Webster's other meaning for the word.

[McCulloch]

The hang-up comes because we use the word ‘science’ in a popular fashion that is not related to this meaning of ‘science’.

Like many words 'science' has more than one meaning also the word 'science' is often used as a short hand for 'natural science' and many people use this without comprehending that there is more than one meanig.

I think your post indicates that you do not accept Webster's other meaning for the word.

First you complain that people are using the word science in a popular fashion. Then I bring up a definition of science from those who teach it at an advanced level and you say that one of Webster's is better.

from
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
n.

1. 1. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
   2. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
   3. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3. An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4. Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
5. Christian Science.

Naturally, I favour definition 1 above.

or Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Main Entry: sci·ence
Pronunciation: 'sI-&n(t)s
Function: noun
: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through the scientific method and concerned with the physical world and its phenomena

I'll accept Merriam-Webster's Medical definition.

or if you favour philosophy, here is what the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has to say:
Science is often distinguished from other domains of human culture by its progressive nature: in contrast to art, religion, philosophy, morality, and politics, there exist clear standards or normative criteria for identifying improvements and advances in science.

Since you entitled the thread with "Ethics is a Science", I naturally assumed that you meant the more formal definition of science.

[coberst]

The hang-up comes because we use the word ‘science’ in a popular fashion that is not related to this meaning of ‘science’.

Like many words 'science' has more than one meaning also the word 'science' is often used as a short hand for 'natural science' and many people use this without comprehending that there is more than one meanig.

I think your post indicates that you do not accept Webster's other meaning for the word.

First you complain that people are using the word science in a popular fashion. Then I bring up a definition of science from those who teach it at an advanced level and you say that one of Webster's is better.

from
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
n.

1. 1. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
   2. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
   3. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3. An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4. Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
5. Christian Science.

Naturally, I favour definition 1 above.

or Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Main Entry: sci·ence
Pronunciation: 'sI-&n(t)s
Function: noun
: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through the scientific method and concerned with the physical world and its phenomena

I'll accept Merriam-Webster's Medical definition.

or if you favour philosophy, here is what the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has to say:
Science is often distinguished from other domains of human culture by its progressive nature: in contrast to art, religion, philosophy, morality, and politics, there exist clear standards or normative criteria for identifying improvements and advances in science.

Since you entitled the thread with "Ethics is a Science", I naturally assumed that you meant the more formal definition of science.

It appears that we are just debating a matter of semantics.

[McCulloch]

It appears that we are just debating a matter of semantics.

Semantics can be important. Semantics is the study of language meaning. We cannot properly debate a question unless we have a common understanding of the terms in the question for debate.

Biology, Chemistry, Anthropology and Geology are sciences. Mathematics, Philosophy, Theology, History and Ethics are not.

There are certainly interrelations between studies which are sciences and those which are not. Mathematics is essential to Chemistry. Anthropology may study the History of Theology. Certain Biological experiments are subject to Ethical considerations.

Now, if what you are talking about is The Science of Good and Evil: Why People Cheat, Gossip, Care, Share, and Follow the Golden Rule by Michael Shermer which is about using the sciences to explore the development of human ethics, then I think it is a great idea.

[coberst]

Let us see how we would categorize certain entities.

I think that ‘domain of knowledge’ could be a category and within that category we would have physics and philosophy. Both would be properly a domain of knowledge because we can identify the essential characteristics that both share in common.