Science is about what is. Morality is about what should be. In the Middle Ages, Western man believed God was micro-managing everything. There must not have been much of a divide between science and morality in those days. God’s will was automatically the ultimate good and the way things were the expression of that will. I guess things were a lot simpler then. If anyone tried to question those verities, he was burned as a heretic.
Reason, Enlightenment and Renaissance made things a lot more complex (and more interesting). Man came to understand that what is was not the same thing as what should be. Sure, it all had to be God’s will as long of God was believed to be in charge. But God’s will wasn’t always the good. God allowed evil to reign for limited periods of time with the understanding, of course, that the good would eventually win.
Atheism opened up a whole lot of other possibilities. Without God’s will and the Bible, man had to figure out what was good on his own. Hence, philosophy replaced theology. All that uncertainty must have given man the willies. Thank gods science was developed at a pathway to certainty. But science was limited in that it was only allowed to study what is, not what should be. Still, society seems pretty settled on the nature of good and evil.
Of the many fields of scientific inquiry, psychiatry and psychology are the most loosey-goosey and, hence, the least certain. Still, those who labored in those fields usually tried their best to stay true to science. Below are some exceptions…
- Simon Sez. Psychologist George Simon thinks psychopathy should be called a “character” disorder instead of a personality disorder because we are bad people with a bad character. So imagine my surprise when I read that this same man has said we are born this way.
- Malignant Narcissism.
- Science and Morality. In a pluralistic society such as ours, philosophy and religion are considered the realm of the individual. That is simply because people can’t agree.
- Shrinkocracy Anyone? The shrinks are trying to take over the world. This one issue of Today’s Psychopathic Times has an article suggesting psychiatrists vet political candidates to see if they are mentally healthy enough to serve as president.