Morality and Science by

Provide another example (aside from women's suffrage) of a period when morality motivated science.

yadiraochoa2 — 2025-11-05 22:29:43 UTC

Another example of a period when morality motivated science was in the mid-late 20th century when there were public health campaigns against smoking. The moral concern of society and scientists made scientists expose the dangers of smoking in order to prevent people from smoking and developing a disease.

Example of a period when morality motivated science

2025-11-06 04:37:11 UTC

Morality motivated the shift toward biodegradable and sustainable packaging by awakening a sense of responsibility both personal and collective for the environmental damage caused by plastic waste. People began to see the suffering caused by plastic pollution dead marine animals, microplastics in food and water, overflowing landfills and felt a moral obligation to act.

Example of a period when morality motivated science

2025-11-06 19:01:29 UTC

An example of when morality motivated science is the ‘The Abolitionist Movement’ of the 18th and 19th centuries, when science was again fueled by morality, this time through opposition to slavery based on notions of white superiority that, surprisingly, still considered Africa a potential site of research. In this case, most of these people and researchers believed that their study would help them demonstrate that all people are equal through science and research about human anatomy, intelligence, and culture, as people such as Alexander von Humboldt and later Franz Boas used these studies as proof that race is not a biological fact, and that science was again fueled by morality, as science was used as proof of certain human values, as noted above—humanity, morality, and all that entails.

Example of a period when morality motivated science

lorenzoa2140 — 2025-11-06 19:07:12 UTC

An example of morality motivating science is the environmental movement in the 1960s and 70s. Concerns for protecting the planet and future generations led scientists to study pollution, pesticides, and ecology. People began to notice the harmful effects of pollution, and this led to legislative changes.

Example of a period when morality motivated science

isabelleenriquez — 2025-11-06 19:52:19 UTC

A period when morality motivated science is the case of Roe V. Wade. This is a very controversial example that really made people question morality. There is the “Pro-Life” side and the “Pro-Choice” side. This debate resulted in motivating scientists to determine when and if the termination of a pregnancy is moral.

The Nuremberg Code

2025-11-06 20:14:27 UTC

At the end of World War 2, an American military tribunal opened trials against German physicians for their participation in war crimes. They had experimented on people throughout the duration of the war. These trials would be the first of their kind and would lead to future international laws and medical ethics. Informed consent and the requirement to minimize harm. This would be a foundational document that would establish future institutions to oversee all human research internationally.

2025-11-06 21:33:18 UTC

Option 1- Addelson's Argument

I do agree with Addelson's argument in that science can be motivated through different moralities. This is because humans want to study things that may help to improve our world and make circumstances better for others. This type of science motivation is evident throughout world history. People have always been concerned about the best interests of others, better health, and issues of justice. A great example would be the ongoing work on different medical vaccines. This is an scientific endeavor that can help with overall health of individuals and save countless lives. Today, we also have science developments that are focused on saving our planet for future generations to come. Renewable energy research allows us to do this. Addison's teachings of morality help us to realize that behind all inventions and studies are moral choices in bettering the world and humanity.

option 2

2025-11-06 21:48:42 UTC

I think a good example of when morality motivated science is the environmental movement in the 20th century. People started realizing that pollution, deforestation, and climate change were harming the planet and future generations. This moral concern for protecting life and the Earth inspired scientists to study environmental systems more deeply. Research in areas like renewable energy, conservation biology, and climate science grew out of a sense of responsibility to do what’s right, not just what’s profitable or convenient. In that way, moral values about caring for others and the planet clearly pushed science to advance.

Example of a period when morality motivated science

2025-11-06 22:13:09 UTC

An example of when morality motivated science was when electric vehicles were starting to be made and even the idea of it alone. Pollution and smog is a big factor in everyday life so people starting researching ways to reduce/prevent that in the forms of vehicles. Even today, they are thinking of adding electric only lanes on freeways as well.

Option 1

rnavarro96 — 2025-11-06 23:11:16 UTC

I completely agree with Addelson’s argument that morality motivates science. I believe people are driven to keep investigating and discovering new things because they genuinely want to improve people’s lives, whether through medical advances or by making the world a better, healthier place to live. I believe scientific progress isn’t just about gaining knowledge for its own sake, but that scientific progress is driven by the moral desire to help those around us. I believe it’s fueled by our human instinct to care for one another and to make life better for everyone. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, when several scientists and doctors collaborated to develop a vaccine, they demonstrated their moral values, such as compassion, hope, and a deep concern for people, as they recognized that the virus not only affected those infected but also their loved ones who suffered as well.

Option 1:

aaronthwin06 — 2025-11-06 23:12:50 UTC

I think that Addelson doubts the idea that science is about facts, and morality is about values. It claims that she says, the other way around, morality controls science. This statement is because science is always based on value judgments. Also, I think that science is always based on decisions of what questions need to be asked, and what methods of inquiry need to be used. With the option of gathering evidence based on values of integrity and cooperation, according to the text. From these reasons, Addelson is right when he states that morality evaluates science, but science is guided by morality from its very inception. Even if science still strives for objectivity, its direction and aim have their roots in human values.

Option 1-

2025-11-06 23:24:52 UTC

I agree with Addelson argument, Morality establishes what a person may want to determine whether that is what is good and and right while science evolves research. It establishes what is meant or desired which can be accomplished with science in a way. Through morality we are allowed to question allowing one to explore science. Allowing the establish morality one has to research into questioning science.

Option 2

mzaman14 — 2025-11-07 00:39:17 UTC

I think an example of morality motivating science is when society realized the damage fossil fuels and internal combustion engines were causing to the environment. Scientists started noticing how emissions from cars were destroying the ozone layer and polluting the air, which raised moral concerns about human responsibility toward the planet. Because of this, science shifted its focus toward developing electric vehicles and clean energy as a way to protect future generations. Studies have even shown that since introducing smog programs and increasing the use of electric cars, the ozone layer has started to repair itself. This shows that moral awareness about environmental harm led science to find solutions that align with human values of preservation and care for the Earth.

Option 1:

2025-11-07 01:57:59 UTC

I agree with Addelson’s argument that morality guides what people consider good and right. Science focuses on expanding knowledge through research. Morality helps define our goals and what we hope to achieve in life. But science also provides the tools and methods to reach those goals. In this way, morality sets the foundation for what is worth exploring, and science helps make those moral aims possible. Through morality, we develop the ability to question and evaluate. In the end, moral reflection and scientific inquiry work together. Morality prompts us to ask meaningful questions, and science helps us find the answers to those questions.

Option 1:

2025-11-07 02:20:31 UTC

I agree with Addelson argument that morality drives science because morality provides the desire to determine what's good and what's right, while science provides the mechanism to answer those queries. For instance, the desire to have good health has compelled the scientific community to study diseases, for the health of the people. Scientific inquiry's is the reason we have the answers to our questions.

Option 2:

cervannb — 2025-11-07 02:22:44 UTC

I feel like an example that is not only relevant, but also directly relates to Addelson's argument is COVID-19. The pandemic affected the entire world. It caused a lot of economic and health problems in various communities. The typical vaccine requires 10-15 years of research and development. The chaos and danger of a global pandemic had put a lot of pressure on finding a solution. Many people were losing their lives. Under this pressure, a COVID-19 vaccine was developed in under a year. If this moral pressure had not been induced, then the development of the vaccine would have taken much longer.

Option 1

2025-11-07 03:59:01 UTC

I agree heavily with Addelson's argument that Morality drives Science or science is driven by morality. When we think about science, it is something that is studied and tested through trial and error depending on the need. Humans have all built up our 'morality' through life starting from childhood which evolves as we grow. Scientists work countless hours to help provide more knowledge to the human race, which I believe stems from the natural instinct to help others where our morality comes into play. For example, with the most recent pandemic we've experienced (COVID-19), we began to create vaccines and test kits to help us control our society as much as we can to prevent death among the masses. This good deed or act is driven from the morality I mentioned we as humans get to exude.

Option 1

mpoly — 2025-11-07 04:14:58 UTC

I agree with Addelson because science is not separate from human values. Addelson explains that moral beliefs often come before even scientific discoveries do. She says that when people’s sense of right and wrong changes, it helps scientists decide what to study and how they see the world. During the women’s suffrage movement, people believed it was morally right for women to have equal rights. This moral idea came around first and led people to look for new kinds of evidence and research to support equality.

Many scientific changes start of with moral questions, what we care for or think is fair. When our moral views change, our science often follows after.

Option 2

2025-11-07 04:40:09 UTC

Another example of morality motivating science was the rise of environmental science. Issues like pollution, endangered species, and climate change were not looked into just because of curiosity, they were researched due to moral concern of the planet and it’s future

2025-11-07 04:48:29 UTC

I agree with the argument made by Addelson because scientific activity is sometimes the result of morally driven reasons, for example, the desire to alleviate suffering or bring about justice. A clear example, relating to saving human lives, is the connection between scientific activity in the health care field and the morally driven reason of saving human life.

Option 1

darienapke1 — 2025-11-07 05:03:11 UTC

I definitely agree with Addelson's argument that morality can motivate science. Human's prioritize knowledge for things that can be benefical towards the common population. Scientists dedicate their lives in order to discover cures and fixes for common problems amongst individuals. This is all driven by the morals of humans as a whole.

Option 2

2025-11-07 05:19:49 UTC

An example other than the woman’s suffrage that was morality motivated science is animal testing. People began to see that animal testing was unethical and cruel. Animals were being mistreated and this lead scientists to find more humane ways without causing harm to the animal. This showed that science can be compassionate and kind.

Option 1

jckceballos01 — 2025-11-07 05:31:12 UTC

I agree with Addelson because I think people's sense of right and wrong can prompt others to question things and seek new answers. Morality provides science with a reason to evolve. For example, I have always been interested in how people talk more about mental health now than in the past. It began as a moral concern about helping others feel understood, which in turn prompted science to study mental health more deeply. I believe this illustrates how a genuine concern for others can lead to discoveries and positive change.

Option 1

2025-11-07 05:42:13 UTC

I agree with the argument Addelson provides that morality motivates science. She explains that science is not free from values, as it questions and aims to reflect human concerns and commitments. Values like honesty, accuracy, and the will to knowledge for the common good of humankind are what guides scientific work. Rather than being separate from morality, science depends on it to shape its purpose and direction.

Option 1

j9hndinh — 2025-11-07 06:07:08 UTC

I agree with Addelson’s view that moral values can inspire scientific progress. People tend to seek knowledge that serves the well-being of others, and many scientists devote their efforts to finding cures and solving everyday issues. This commitment to discovery reflects humanity’s moral drive to improve and protect life.

Option 2

emmapchavvez04 — 2025-11-07 06:09:22 UTC

I think another good example of a period in history when morality motivated science is the Aids epidemic, which took place from about 1980 to 1990. This was a time of intense moral judgment and stigmatization, which was directly combatted with urgency and compassion for those who had fallen ill with the deadly disease. At the start of the epidemic, the disease was heavily stigmatized as many outside of the LGBTQ+ community judged and shamed those who had fallen ill, deeming the disease a punishment to the LGBTQ+ community. Regardless of judgment, many grew compassionate as the disease did not discriminate against its victims, killing countless individuals, regardless of sexuality. Unfortunately, the widespread spread of the disease led to the need for a vaccine — and fast. It was this very moral urgency and compassion from the public that eventually led to the scientific discovery of a cure for the deadly illness.

Option 1

2025-11-07 06:35:39 UTC

I for surely agree with addelsons argument of morality has the opportunity to motivate science. Lots of people often near towards knowledge that helps and supports the benefits of the common population. An example can be the common fact of astronomers and scientists who search for new cures, new habitable planets and anything that can benefit human kind as a whole.

Option 1

jacobmoreira1 — 2025-11-07 07:15:10 UTC

I agree with Addelson's argument that morality can motivate science, because, in retrospect, that is what it's about. Scientists continue to seek new discoveries that improve human life in various fields, ranging from medicine to technology. Without morality, there would be no purpose in solving new questions.

Option 1

ashleynunez2 — 2025-11-07 07:16:18 UTC

I agree with Addelson's argument that morality motivates science. As Addelson points out, during the debate over whether women should be able to vote, there was "data" to back up why women shouldn't, whereas Mills and Grimke had no data to show why women should. Still, the desire for change, because it should be a part of women's rights, motivated them to find the data as to why women should have the right to vote.

Option 1

2025-11-07 07:49:27 UTC

I agree with Addelson’s argument that morality motivates science because scientific inquiry is often guided by human values and ethical concerns, not just by curiosity or the pursuit of truth. In the class reading, Addelson points out that science is shaped by the moral goals of improving society, solving problems, and reducing suffering. For example, the development of modern medicine was driven not only by the desire to understand the human body but also by the moral duty to save lives and ease pain. Even today, scientists working on renewable energy or climate research are motivated by the ethical responsibility to protect the planet and future generations. This shows that science is deeply connected to moral purpose—its direction and impact depend on what people believe is worth striving for.

Option 2

2025-11-08 03:41:15 UTC

Another example I can think of when morality motivated science was during the fight to end smoking in public places. When people learned about the dangers of secondhand smoke scientists began to feel a moral duty to protect public health. That's when they started to research and proved how cigarette smoke harmed others which then led to smoke free laws and more warning labels on tobacco products. This shows that moral concern for others well being can push science to feel the need to make society a little safer.

Option 1

cesarramirez31 — 2025-11-08 07:57:20 UTC

I have to agree with Addelsso's argument as it is. I agree because I like the way she explains that science is not free from values. For example, Scientists search for different cures and solutions to try and help people, which shows how ethical values guide research.