Some researchers argue that the innovation in science has a direct relationship with the advancement in morality. This argument, therefore, shows the link that exists between science and moral aspects. These researchers address various reasons as to why they support the fact that moral values and scientific advancements have a relationship. Conversely, some scientists criticize the fact that morality has an influence on scientific research. Accordingly, these researchers also criticize the way in which scientific facts relate to moral values. This paper discusses the morals value associated with science showing both the agreements and disagreements presented by two different authors Emile Durkheim and Max Weber.
Science and Morality by Emile Durkheim
According to Emile Durkheim, the advancement in morality and the widespread promotion of ethical behaviors influence the improvement in scientific innovations (Dillon 143). Morality influences science in a variety of ways. Firstly, there exists a symbiotic connection between the advancement in moral values and the progress in scientific facts and innovations. Secondly, research shows that morality helps protect against reaching a maximum value. In addition, morality gives the guidelines required by scientists during scientific advancements. Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, helps in shaping moral values and framing judgments that are more reliable. Moral values are essential in conducting research and drawing of reliable findings and conclusions. Ethical values are open to scrutiny in drawing evidence and reasons.
The Symbiotic Connection between Morality and Science
Durkheim argued that moral practices encourage people to take up responsibility in promoting scientific advancements. On the other hand, immorality deprives people of the responsibility that would play a role in promoting scientific advancements. Therefore, people should first promote morality through many ways. For instance, people should familiarize themselves with the moral theory. Secondly, people should carry out an awareness program intended to promote ethical values and practices. Moreover, through the promotion of morality, then people get the encouragement vital for them to understand the importance of taking up responsibility in scientific advancements. In addition, the progress in science plays a significance role in supporting moral improvement. Weber argues that the recent psychological works and cognitive science reveal facts concerning moral intuitions, a mental framework for processing morality, intellectual heuristics, and expansion in moral views and theories. Ultimately, these facts possess the ability to enlighten on practical ethics and principles pertaining to morality.
Morality and Local Maximum Value
Scientific advancements help the scientists to intensify human intelligence to the point that there is a realization of moral values. For example, the detonation of mass destruction weapons ends the hope for the rise in local maximum value, which is morally wrong. The realization of moral values is only possible if there is control of the maximum value. The control of maximum value is possible whereby there is monitoring in the proliferation of weaponry. The elevation and advancement of moral values will help protect any moral atrocities. Weber argues that the promotion of moral values will play a role in convincing people to take responsibility to carry out advancements that are more scientific (Dillon 206). Therefore, promoting the promotion of moral values prevents hitting the maximum value.
According to Emile Durkheim, morality plays the important role of guiding scientific advancements and innovations (Dillon 107). Durkheim argues that morality helps researchers avoid vices that distort discipline in science. For instance, the moral practice of honesty helps researchers and scientists avoid plagiarism whereby one scientist replicates the work done by another without lawful consent and consequently without acknowledging the original researcher or scientist. Moreover, the moral value of cooperation helps scientists to cooperate and share their knowledge, a move that is vital in ensuring invention of new scientific facts. Ethical values of truth and integrity render scientists reliable in their scientific works.
According to Max Weber, morality helps scientists make scientific research judgments that also encourage human intelligence advancement (Dillon 132). The lack of morality in scientific advancements would otherwise mean a scientifically advanced world with cold and cruel scientists. Furthermore, virtues and character help shape scientific advancements. Undoubtedly, scientific innovations that exclude moral values can lead to suffering and an enormous loss in human values. Moral values are significant in criticizing, evaluating, and interpreting scientific laws. Moral values also help in analyzing complex scientific problems for example, when studying global warming a scientist should be in a position to determine the economical, ecological, and ethical perspectives concerning global warming facts.
Moral values also aid the goals and objectives of research and apply to scientists or scholarly scientific activists. Moral values in research are important because of various reasons. Firstly, moral values promote the goals of research for instance knowledge, certainty, and error avoiding. Goals that apply these goals include prohibitions against false scientific argumentations, misinterpreted research, and fabrications. Secondly, since scientific research involves cooperation and coordination, moral values help in promoting collaborative work. Besides, the practice of moral values benefits researchers since they build public support necessary for quality and integrity.
Ethical Misconduct in Science
Even though cases of misconduct in science are rare, they have a great impact on science and the society because of various reasons. For instance, ethical faults in research can negatively affect the integrity in research fields, diminish public trust, and waste resources and time. Two theories explain the reason behind misconduct between researchers and scientists. The bad apple theory argues that majority of the scientists are unethical. The bad apple theory further explains that only morally corrupt, economically deprived, and psychologically unstable researchers practice unethical misconducts.
Moreover, only fools would practice misconducts since the review systems will catch up with people who carry out faults in the end. The imperfect environmental theory argues that factors that lead to misconducts include institutional pressures, enticements, and constraints. For all that, the imperfect environment theory explains that stressful conditions encourage morally weak and ignorant individuals to commit unethical activities. Weber argues that the fact that most of the review systems are not accurate enables morally deprived people to practice fraudulent behaviors and evade detention and punishments (Dillon 128).
Moral Deviations in Research
Many of the deviations in the research field relate to the fact that researchers fail to take the aspects of research seriously. For instance, some authorship practices reveal traditional practices that lacked seriously questioning for a long time. Accordingly, if the lab director’s name appears in every material that originates from his or her lab though he or she issued minimal or no contribution, then some people may argue, however, that the habitual way in the way things operate in that lab. Also, uncertainty may occur where there exists ignorance or erroneous traditions in research. Furthermore, circumstances may force a researcher to uphold that traditional or routine relationship, for example, acquiring stock from a drug manufacturing company for research sponsorship poses no ethical malpractice. Moreover, if the deviations in research result from ignorance or failure to understand the challenging traditions, a research ethics program may help researchers understand the importance of ethics and moral values in science.
Agreement between the two authors
According to the two authors, we see the relationship between morality and science. Firstly, the two authors acknowledge that there exists a connection between morality and science. For instance, Durkheim argues that there exists a symbiotic relationship between morality and science. In addition, he posits that morality offers guidelines for scientific advancements. Weber explains that morality prevents researchers from reaching the maximum value. Similarly, Durkheim argues that morality has a relationship with science since it plays a role in the formulation of scientific judgments. Durkheim argues that morality aids in the attainment of research goals and objectives (Dillon 139). Secondly, both scientists claim that morality helps provide guidelines for researchers. Weber argues that moral values such as honesty help researchers maintain the originality of their work. Moreover, Durkheim argues that morality helps in attainment of scientific advancements through cooperation.
Disagreement between the two authors
The two authors agree on various arguments about morality and science. However, there are various disagreeing facts formulated by the two authors. There exist differences in the way the authors describe the relationship between morality and science. For instance, according to Weber, there exist various ethical misconducts in science making scientific innovations less efficient (Dillon 98.). Accordingly, Durkheim explains that even though morality guides scientific advancements some aspects of immorality lead to a lack of integrity diminished public trust and wastage of resources. Durkheim explains that various reasons make scientists and researchers practice morally wrong activities. For instance, Durkheim argues that institutional pressures, constraints, and enticements lead to the commitment of immoral activities. Furthermore, he addresses the issue of the existence of moral deviations in research. On the other hand, Weber does not show any negativity of morality and science but only identifies the positivity of the relationship between morality and science.
Conclusion
According to authors, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, there exists a connection between morality and science. Both authors convey their arguments as to how morality and science share a connection. Durkheim argues that there exists a symbiotic relationship between science and morality, morality reduces the maximum value and morality plays a role in scientific advancements. On the other hand, Weber argues that morality plays a role in scientific research judgments. However, there also exists a negative in science and morality shown by the adverse effects of immorality in the scientific and research fields. Both authors issue similar definitions of ethics and the relationship between ethics and science. Conversely, Durkheim shows the downside of morality and ethics not at all addressed by Weber. According to Weber, it is true to argue that despite the relationship between morality and science, there still exists a negative side. Durkheim, therefore, takes the initiative of going an extra mile to address the negativity that depicts the differing aspect of the authors. However difficult it may be to separate science and values from each other, one needs to try and be neutral when conducting research.
Works Cited
Dillon, Michele. Introduction To Sociological Theory. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. Print.
