| OCR Text |
Show Scientific Morals Of The Scientist Editor: Dr. Wullstein's article in Thursday's Thurs-day's Chronicle was interesting. But the professor does not distinguish disting-uish between differences in morality moral-ity as applied to science versus morality as applied to the scientist. scien-tist. And he does not seem to have a clear definition of "morality." In the same paragraph he speeks of morality within science and of morality not influencing the "practitioners "prac-titioners of science." There is a difference. Honesty is a moral principle it is part of morality. Science is neither honest nor dishonest. Scientists Sci-entists can be either. And a dishonest dis-honest scientist is not pursuing "intellectual enlightenment." I submit that moraltiy does influence in-fluence the scientist and that it does affect his search for understanding. understand-ing. Perhaps the Professor confuses some of our social mores with moral mor-al principles. He does refer to the idea of a "social stigma." Perhaps he is thinking of the various interpretations interp-retations of morality as expressed by behavior. Or he might be thinking think-ing of superstitions that exist. I don't know. We can speak of sexual morality. A scientist can commit adultery and that act might not influence his pursuit of scientific enlightment. However, that act could influence his enlightenment in other areas of intellectual involvement. Science is but a small part of intellectual endeavor. en-deavor. Dr. Wullstein has some good ideas floating around the back of his mind. But his symbolic representation representa-tion of those ideas on paper is seriously ser-iously muddled. Dale L. Van Wagoner |
