sdv wrote:
>
> Brad
>
> > > I would certainly not dissent from the accusation that scientists lie.
> > [snip]
> >
> > Surely there is nothing *particularly* shameful about this (i.e.,
> > *more* shameful than lawyers or teachers of doctors or managers or
> > [whoevers] lying), for
>
> It is particularly bad and particularly shameful for scientists and
> technologists to lie because they, like priests and jurists have a
> responsibility to explicitly state what constitutes the limits of their (our)
> understanding.

Aren't you saying the same as I said, just "from the opposite
direction?  I specifically cited persons with positions of
*stewardship* for the welfare of others.

Whereas I said that for a scientist to lie is not worse than
for a teacher or doctor (etc.) to do so, you say that for
a scientist to lie is no better than for such a person
to do so.  I think that, rhetoric aside, "the net" is that
it is *equally* bad for any person in a position of stewardship
to lie -- doctors, teachers, scientists, et al.

Perhaps a serious issue is whether scientists take their
responsibility as seriously, and whether society holds them
as accountable, as teachers, doctors, and, as you appositely
added, priests and jurists....

I even wonder whether the cliche has merit that
science constitutes the "Church" of our time, and
scientists the clergy thereof.

[snip]
> science depends on other forms of knowledge, narrative, political etc to
> legitimate and make its status as true acceptable.

I agree.  There simply is no observation without motivation,
even if that motivation is to attain the rational ecstasy
of intuition of the "eide" of mathematical "laws of nature",
or to shove those laws down the throats of those social
organs (like The Roman Catholic Church) which may have
oppressed oneself and/or one's "heroes" [Susanne Langer,
in _Philosophy in a New Key_,
proposed this is one of the reasons the often meaning-
*destroying* (demystifying, etc.) activity of science
*appeals* to persons to undertake it, i.e., why it
is meaning*ful* to them.]

>
> i propose that the reason it is more shameful is because of the huge effects
> that scientific and technical work can have in the world - GM and BSE raise
> their heads above the horizon of what is legitimate and acceptable.

Again agreed.  But is not this the same sense in which we
would be even more distressed by a "crooked" Supreme Court
judge than by an equally crooked local magistrate?  Or
by a crooked CEO of a multinational corporation than
by a crooked Dunkin Donut shop assistant manager?

But I would go further:

    From those to whom much has been given,
    Much should be expected.

>
> regards as usual
>
> sdv

Best wishes to all, on this All Souls Day!

+\brad mccormick

--
  Let your light so shine before men,
              that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)

  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)

<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [log in to unmask]
  914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua NY 10514-3403 USA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/