Bioethics Science: Is it?
Both western and eastern civilizations have linked moral teaching with theology followed by philosophy. New-knowledge-seekers about natural world, were called ‘natural philosophers'. There was a paradigm shift during industrial revolution in western world which culminated in modern science. The...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
2009-10-01
|
Series: | Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journals.tums.ac.ir/upload_files/pdf/14247.pdf |
id |
doaj-f9f9d9322e3b4dccbad2a7b7b72cc41e |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f9f9d9322e3b4dccbad2a7b7b72cc41e2020-11-25T03:50:03ZengTehran University of Medical SciencesJournal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine2008-03872009-10-01217Bioethics Science: Is it? Jayapaul AzariahBoth western and eastern civilizations have linked moral teaching with theology followed by philosophy. New-knowledge-seekers about natural world, were called ‘natural philosophers'. There was a paradigm shift during industrial revolution in western world which culminated in modern science. The word "scientist" was coined during the 19th century. The paper examines whether natural philosophers could be called ‘scientists'? A short history of philosophical paradigm shift is given.Although written moral and "ethical principles" were in vogue from the time of Hammurabi (1750-1795 BC), the phenomenon of bioethics is very recent. Bioethics is a bridge among different sciences and a bridge to the future. The question is: Is bioethics, by itself, science? The present paper is concerned with the quality of bioethics and about the nature of science during the next 30-50 years.Science is value-free but bioethics is value-loaded. Science does not proclaim any value whereas bioethics underlines the moral life and its value to survive. The paper examines two issues: Can science be bioethics-friendly? and (ii) Can bioethics be science-friendly? It appears that both science and bioethics are incompatible. We need to develop a new system of knowledge to include/infuse the bioethical-notion of values in (into) science. Such a move may necessitate the development of an alternate but new model. Bioethics is not a science-discipline. A new term to replace science is needed. Elevating bioethics as an academic science may create job openings in India. http://journals.tums.ac.ir/upload_files/pdf/14247.pdfScienceScientistsBioethicsImmoral sciencesEvolutionary ethicsMorals |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Jayapaul Azariah |
spellingShingle |
Jayapaul Azariah Bioethics Science: Is it? Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Science Scientists Bioethics Immoral sciences Evolutionary ethics Morals |
author_facet |
Jayapaul Azariah |
author_sort |
Jayapaul Azariah |
title |
Bioethics Science: Is it? |
title_short |
Bioethics Science: Is it? |
title_full |
Bioethics Science: Is it? |
title_fullStr |
Bioethics Science: Is it? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Bioethics Science: Is it? |
title_sort |
bioethics science: is it? |
publisher |
Tehran University of Medical Sciences |
series |
Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine |
issn |
2008-0387 |
publishDate |
2009-10-01 |
description |
Both western and eastern civilizations have linked moral teaching with theology followed by philosophy. New-knowledge-seekers about natural world, were called ‘natural philosophers'. There was a paradigm shift during industrial revolution in western world which culminated in modern science. The word "scientist" was coined during the 19th century. The paper examines whether natural philosophers could be called ‘scientists'? A short history of philosophical paradigm shift is given.Although written moral and "ethical principles" were in vogue from the time of Hammurabi (1750-1795 BC), the phenomenon of bioethics is very recent. Bioethics is a bridge among different sciences and a bridge to the future. The question is: Is bioethics, by itself, science? The present paper is concerned with the quality of bioethics and about the nature of science during the next 30-50 years.Science is value-free but bioethics is value-loaded. Science does not proclaim any value whereas bioethics underlines the moral life and its value to survive. The paper examines two issues: Can science be bioethics-friendly? and (ii) Can bioethics be science-friendly? It appears that both science and bioethics are incompatible. We need to develop a new system of knowledge to include/infuse the bioethical-notion of values in (into) science. Such a move may necessitate the development of an alternate but new model. Bioethics is not a science-discipline. A new term to replace science is needed. Elevating bioethics as an academic science may create job openings in India. |
topic |
Science Scientists Bioethics Immoral sciences Evolutionary ethics Morals |
url |
http://journals.tums.ac.ir/upload_files/pdf/14247.pdf |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT jayapaulazariah bioethicsscienceisit |
_version_ |
1724492702271143936 |