Science, Religion, Morals, Curiosity etc.

I blame Sam Harris for kicking off a topic regarding science and morals. A generally observed viewpoint is that Science makes no comment about morals. It can tell you how to make a nuclear bomb but cant really tell you whether to use it or not. Science does not provide a framework to evaluate moral right or wrong. Sam Harris thinks otherwise, that there are some calls that science can make. And takes some non controversial and some controversial examples related to human wellbeing (which I suppose he equates to morally right). Other people like Sean Carroll weigh in , a debate ensues and some insults are flung , some apologies are made. I'm not sure what the answer to the question is , but one thing is certain, if Science can't make a call, ever, (as Carroll implies), then probably no one can. Religious people and scientific accomodationists love to step in here and say morals can be determined by religion, but history shows that religion can be trusted to almost always make the wrong call. In any case while religion may put forth a claim of what it deems moral, there is really no way to verify , nor can you really evaluate competing and contradictory claims made by different religions. If you could do this , then the principles you would use would have to be scientific and then you are back to where you started, science can evaluate morals. If science can't evaluate then we can only say we think, what we assume but we would never *know*. The only way forward would be consensus, and again we can see from history this doesn't really work. While a lot of people may believe that discriminating against gay people is morally wrong, the *consensus*, read majority, don't hold that view, just as erstwhile majorities didn't hold the view that slavery is wrong or imperialism is wrong.

Which leads us into one of the major difference between a religious person and a scientifically oriented person, the scientifically oriented person always wants to know. The religious person not so much. Take for e.g. The question "Does prayer work?". A scientific person would already have experiments in his head about how to verify. You would want double blind tests to eliminate placebos. You'd try out various types of prayer and by various people. The religious person on the other hand doesn't really want to know, he wants to have his beliefs reinforced. He'll either state that you cannot determine the answer to this question scientifically. Or in the rare cases that he does agree , he will wait till the results are in. If the tests show that prayer does work (perhaps in some limited circumstances) we'll be told I told you so. If it doesn't work , then we will have a list of excuses why the dragon in the garage cant be verified. Even worse , it is the scientific person who is accused of being close minded. Whereas clearly if the data did show that prayer works , repeatedly, using independent experiments, then the point would have to be conceded. On the other hand the religious person never accepts that prayer doesn't work. What's interesting that though people claim they believe in prayer , all their actions indicate that they don't really. You might pray that you get a job, but rarely does everyone think that if you pray there shouldn't be unemployment , the prayer will be answered. While people may pray for a particular sick person to be healed, they don't pray that there should be no sickness (or atleast they don't expect it to be answered). It looks like they believe God can only perform small miracles, not major ones. Cure a blind person, sure , just pray. Cure blindness for all? Uhh no that can't be done - God can't solve all our problems, or Humans are responsible for suffering or where there is happiness there must be sadness etc etc, but evidently all those excuses don't apply while you are dealing with a small miracle that might have happened anyway. It looks dishonest and I wonder if people who give explanations like the above , really , really believe what they say or is it just whats the harm attitude? (possibly quite a bit)