how is impartiality in scientific point of view different from legal point of view?
Answers
Answer:
By comparing scientific point of view with legal point of view, he says that a judge may only be impartial in giving his judgment between two individuals, whereas a scientist is impartial not only between people but also about a tape worm and the solar system.
Hope it helps you :)
Answer:
This essay was written by JBS Haldane, a British born geneticist and
evolutionary biologist. He contributed in the development of neo-Darwinian thinking.
Haldane’s essay science and the future were remarkable in predicting many scientific
advances. In the scientific point of view he opposes superstitions and supports rational
thinking.
According to Haldane, science affects us in two ways – we are benefitted by its
applications; for example, using cars, buses and motor vehicles instead of using horse
drawn vehicles and for diseases we are going to doctor instead of going for superstitions things (witch). The second one is it influences on our opinions as everyone
believes that the earth is round and the heavens are nearly empty instead of solid.
Haldane says that the scientist is superior to God. As he is ethically neutral, he works out of the consequences of many actions. Haldane says that science attempts to be truthful and impartial. By comparing scientific point of view with legal point of view, he says that a judge may be impartial in giving his Judgment between two individuals, where as a scientist is impartial not only between people but also about a tapeworm and the solar system. By comparing scientific point of view with god’s view, he says that scientists interpret the consequences of many actions rather than passing judgmentswhich is while done by god.The tendency of the average man has always dwelt on emotional and ethical side of an issue rather than on facts. For this, Haldane mentioned the problem of
American Negros. Some Americans believe that Negros are inferior to them and they
should be segregated from them. While some believe that they should enjoy the same rights like white Americans. But the scientists make it that both these groups of people are comfortable only in their respective areas and both of them die whenever they strp in to each other’s areas.
Haldane remarks that our approach to the problem of disease is even less rational. He says that the pre-Christians believe that if someone was suffering from any disease, they feel that it was a punishment from some god but Haldane makes it clear that health and sickness are part of nature.
Haldane says that modern medicine has come out with miraculous drugs but it has become very hard to apply its results in practice. For example, diabetes can easily
be controlled by taking insulin but people hardly take the suggestions of doctors.
Typhoid can be controlled by using boiling water. Diphtheria, small pox and Measles,
the air born diseases can be prevented by public efforts, but most of the people do not
care to follow this. The reason is that we do not have scientific spirit. Haldane remarks that the common people always attempt to cure from their diseases but scientist attempts to prevent the disease.
Finally Haldane says that men and women should not be guided by false principles. He concludes that unless and until humans adopt scientific point of view, the enemies of science can not be conquered.