I don't see how a non scientist could create a nuclear weapon.
Well usually they are made by engineers, scientist just figured out the prinicples behind the nuclear bomb.
. I think it is possible to have ethical problems with scientific research.
I dont think so, you can have ethical problems with research methods but not research itself. Research is gathering information unless you are arguing its better to be ignorant then informed. What you do whit that information though has moral and ethical implications.
For instance, research into race differences and sex differences and sexuality differences can be harmful/pernicious.
Unless research reveals there are no real differences that count ending racism and mesoginy in one research paper. but we dont know unless we do the research.
The idea that scientists should be allowed to do what they please because science is neutral holds no water with me.
The idea of blocking research sounds like censorship to me.
There is a process by which "appropriate" questions are selected. This is influenced by biases, ideologies and historical eras etc.
Oh what is this process
One problem is whether the scientific paradigm has access to all facts or areas of enquiry. And so when you get an area like mind which is only available to one person (the subject) science can just dismiss first person evidence or try and down play it's relevance. So this at its extreme has led to theorists like Dennet and The Churchland's denying mental states (Eliminative materialism) that we know immediately from direct experience exist.
This privacy of mental states leads to a lot of problems including diagnosing mental illness. (I have personal experience here) And people have made allegations of historic child abuse that they can't prove because the main remaining evidence is in their private memories. I personally would love to have CCTV footage of my childhood to show people and to clarify to myself what actually happened. Thankfully I can prove somethings happened to me through collaborative witnesses.
Cognitive scientists have cast doubt on the validity of memories which is damaging. I know which schools I went to and where I lived as a child and I can prove it by documentary evidence. We have a lot of reliable memories for instance we know the meaning of thousands of words we learnt decades ago and we remember how to get around town and that 2+2=4. Yet cognitive scientist are trying to under mine the reliability of our cognitive states in an attempt (I think) to try and create a false objectivity about mind.
Yea that's why most of these social sciences are labelled soft science.
Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.
™ Version 4.2