'good' versus 'bad'

Science is neutral. Scientists, however, are driven by personal motives. Remove the motivation for bad scientists (usually located around personal gain and/or esteem) and the problem is solved.

Idea for the world
Sciences
Vote
23%
77%
Votes
17
Views
3369

15 Comments

  • The POW can not remove anything only advise, in any case is not the scientist normally but mostly those that employ them make profit that are the ones that are after personal gain.

  • I object because of 2 things,
    1. You can't remove motives from people without significant brain surgery or mind reading (which in itself should never happen regardless of people's nature)
    2. It is often these Bad scientists that allows advancement.
    What would be a good idea is to allow scientists to do things without the limit of morals, I don't mean let them take people from the streets, no. I mean death role prisoners who consent for experiments. By removing boundaries set by a flawed human state of mind makes huge advance in science.

  • I object because Scientists should do freely(in a sense), and stopping them would be really difficult- not physically, reasonably. We would get carried away, and besides, what you are suggesting is unfair. You(in my opinion) are saying that we should decide whether what scientists do is right or wrong. THEY are the scientists, not us.

  • ..... could you BE more general? This is just a simple observation, not a solution. Think practically.

  • I think I understand what you are trying to say...it's like having psychopathic psychologists determining who is psychopathic. But your good vs. bad can relate to thousands of other occupations that impact our world.

  • The motivation for bad scientists is part of the motivation for good scientists and is needed by all scientists to live their lives while working, money.

  • I object because it is impossible to remove human motivational means, one way or another they will find a way to gain from it, if a person is "bad" it does not just go away.

  • I object because you cant force someone to change their motivation and i dont see what problem this would solve

  • There is no solution implementation offered here, idea is childish and unrealistic without a suggested method to achieve aim.

  • I object because : That is not a solution. That is a point of perspective.

    There are merely objectives to be achieved in scientific research, like the perfection of the absolutely driest martini. The problem isn't the scientists, or the sciences, it's the corporations that hire them to create a "product." Globalization of corporations is the downfall of all aspects of mankind. I've never met a 'mad' scientist, I've only met angry scientists who are tired of poor working conditions and lack of gin breaks.

  • I object because I don't think all scientists are driven by personal motives.

Similar Ideas: