TOPIC：科学技术对社会风俗和道德规范的作用深度

霁月难逢UID: 2718354

ISSUE88 Technologies not only influence but actually determine social customs and ethics.

---------------------------------------

恩 没什么要说的 辩呗

测试一下辩论帖的功能如何

辩论其实就是对题目brainstorming的过程 题目没有什么难的 当做一个普普通通的辩论即可

具体brainstorming相关的东西大家可以看一下下面这个链接：
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=973165&highlight=

----------------------------------------

说明：

1、第一个辩题，挑了一个对立比较鲜明的题目，一般大家写作的切入点要么是正方要么是反方，很少看到能跳出这两个而且不写跑题了的

2、辩论的时候推荐用英文，这样一则平时多用用英文可以帮大家更熟悉的掌握英文输出能力，二则回避了博大精深的天朝文化无法用英文表达出来的尴尬（写作文最不爽的一件事就是你脑子里有超赞的想法但用英文就是表达不出来或者表达不清楚）

3、至于bonus的问题，大家都真么大了，又不是小孩，就不哄着你们来了。只有勤于动手动脑，AW才能复习好，光看别人的是没用的。除非真的是你动脑想过而且敲出来的东西，才可能在考场上出现。

霁月难逢UID: 2718354

词汇解释：

technology

1 a : the practical application of knowledge especially in a particular area : ENGINEERING 2 <medical technology> b : a capability given by the practical application of knowledge <a car's fuel-saving technology>
2 : a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical processes, methods, or knowledge <new technologies for information storage>
3 : the specialized aspects of a particular field of endeavor <educational technology>


custom

1 a : a usage or practice common to many or to a particular place or class or habitual with an individual b : long-established practice considered as unwritten law c : repeated practice d : the whole body of usages, practices, or conventions that regulate social life
2 plural a : duties, tolls, or imposts imposed by the sovereign law of a country on imports or exports b usually singular in construction : the agency, establishment, or procedure for collecting such customs
3 a : business patronage b : usu. habitual patrons : CUSTOMERS
synonyms see HABIT

ethic

1 plural but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation
2 a : a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral values <the present-day materialistic ethic> <an old-fashioned work ethic> ― often used in plural but singular or plural in construction <an elaborate ethics> <Christian ethics> b plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group <professional ethics> c : a guiding philosophy d : a consciousness of moral importance <forge a conservation ethic>
3 plural : a set of moral issues or aspects (as rightness) <debated the ethics of human cloning>

----------------------------------------

1. What does X mean? (Definition)
2. What are the various features of X? (Description)
3. What are the component parts of X? (Simple Analysis)
4. How is X made or done? (Process Analysis)
5. How should X be made or done? (Directional Analysis)
6. What is the essential function of X? (Functional Analysis)
7. What are the causes of X? (Causal Analysis) BE EACW
8. What are the consequences of X? (Causal Analysis)
9. What are the types of X? (Classification)
10. How is X like or unlike Y? (Comparison)
11. What is the present status of X? (Comparison)
12. What is the significance of X? (Interpretation)
13. What are the facts about X? (Reportage)
14. How did X happen? (Narration)
15. What kind of person is X? (Characterization/Profile)
16. What is my personal response to X? (Reflection)
17. What is my memory of X? (Reminiscence)
18. What is the value of X? (Evaluation)
19. What are the essential major points or features of X? (Summary)
20. What case can be made for or against X? (Persuasion)

霁月难逢UID: 2718354

某一年的大专辩论赛中山大学对澳门大学辩题

比赛简述：

辩题：中山大学（科学发展应该有伦理道德界限）：澳门大学（科学发展不应该有伦理道德界限）



中山大学：科学研究的结构与功能，伦理的必要与重要两方面证明我方观点：
第一、科学发展结构：科学研究主体是科学家，须捍卫科学向善性，遵守良知和职业道德。研究什么与如何研究都应有伦理约束；
第二、科学发展功能：遵从伦理界限方能增进人类幸福；
第三、伦理的必要：科学是为人和人为的，人的价值是科学伦理底线；
第四、伦理的重要：科学影响力大，缺乏伦理的科学滑向恶的方向。

澳门大学：第一、界限和规范完全不同，不能混淆；
第二、应用科学和科学应用不同，应用科学无伦理界限，科学应用有伦理界限；
第三、科学求真，伦理求善，如果伦理对科学不了解，如何界限？由什么进行界限？
第四、“真”不由时间空间改变，“善”随时间空间改变，不能用来划界限。




防守：

1、科学发展指的是人类求真理的一个长期过程。伦理道德指的是人类求善过程当中形成的规范。求真是永恒不变的价值，而善在各个时代有不同的定义。例如：原始部落老人死后，所有部落的人可以吃掉这个人。“吃人”不符合当代的伦理道德，但是符合实物极度缺乏时代的伦理道德。

2、科学发展和科技应用、研究手段、科学家是完全不同的事情。在科学研究过程、科技应用过程当中，只要有人参与的地方，都应该有伦理道德的界限。但是伦理道德不应该成为科学发展本身的界限。例如：研究基因工程，可能促使某些科学家制造出灭绝种族的生物武器，这种行为应当受到伦理道德的限制，但是基因工程研究本身，不能受到伦理道德的限制。研究化学毒品，可能让战争狂人得以实施化学战，化学战本身应当受到伦理道德甚至法律的限制，但是研究化学毒品本身并不受伦理道德限制。

3、科学发展为什么不应受到伦理道德限制呢？最重要的一点原因是：科学发展本身是中立的！并没有善恶的区分。只有在人类的介入之后，才产生了善与恶，所以伦理道德应该成为人类行为的界限，而不是成为科学发展本身的界限。例如：研究太空技术，既可以制造太空食品改善人类的生活品质，也可以用来进行太空战争。研究克隆技术，既可以保护珍稀物种，也可以克隆出体格健壮而嗜血的克隆兵团。研究网络技术，既可以提供优质网络服务于人类，也可以用黑客技术攻击银行制造金融灾难。难道说科学技术只要可能对人类有害，就应该禁止这类科学技术的研究？那么所有的学科都可能对人类造成伤害，我们是否都应该禁止其研究呢？物理学专家可以制造原子弹，化学专家可以制造化学毒气，生物学专家可以制造生物武器，政治学家可以制造政治混乱，金融学家可以制造金融危机，文学家可以制造色情文学，计算机专家可以制造计算机病毒，连文化学家都可以制造邪教教义。难道这些学科的发展通通都要受到限制，不准继续进行研究？其实问题的真正症结在于：科学是中立的，单纯的，无辜的。是人类的贪婪、虚荣和欲望，给科学蒙上了恶的面纱。我们应该做的，是使用伦理道德的武器限制人类的原罪，而不是用它来限制科学的发展。人类有罪，而科学无罪！

攻击：

概述：正方最可能攻击的部分是：科学研究过程当中的违反伦理道德的部分，是否应该被禁止。南海之子从来不主张妥协，对付进攻的最有效方式，还是进攻反击，而不能回避。进攻有两方面：1、科学研究过程当中人类参与的部分，人类的行为当然应该受到道德伦理的限制，但是科学研究本人不应该受到约束；2、搅乱视听，模糊伦理道德的界限：谁来定义伦理道德，怎么知道“伦理道德被违反”？伦理道德有这么多的定义，属于主观的产物，在你看来不符合伦理道德，在其他人看来则未必。

1、活体解剖、活体实验是否应该受到禁止？

首先，活体解剖、活体实验属于人类参与的部分，应该受到伦理道德的约束和限制，但是对人体的科学研究不应该受到伦理道德的约束。不管世界上有没有对方说的活体解剖、活体实验，也不管道德伦理如何看待活体解剖、活体实验，对人体的科学研究都应该继续进行下去。其次，对方认为活体解剖、活体实验灭绝人性，所以违反了伦理道德，可是从另外的角度看，这种试验也是道德的。为什么呢？日本731部队对中国战俘进行了大量的灭绝人性的活体解剖、活体实验，但是这些试验大大帮助了日本军人，减少了日本军人在战场上的伤亡，日本正是因为积累了大量的人类活体冻伤试验，才帮助许多北海道渔民出海时候免于冻死。站在中国人角度，中国战俘不应该死，但是站在日本人角度，难道日本的军人、日本的渔民就应该死吗？正是因为有许许多多不同的道德伦理规范，有的道德伦理要求你杀人，有的道德伦理要求你救人，所以就连使用道德伦理约束人类行为方面，都有许多的矛盾和冲突，更不要说想拿道德伦理去约束中立、客观的科学发展了。

美国的医疗法规定，未经人体试验的药物，不得出售！所以在美国使用活体进行药物实验早就屡见不鲜。通常程序是：新药物问世之后，选择患有同样疾病的病人分成2组，其中1组使用新药物，另外1组使用“安慰剂”（无害的假药），科学家比较两组人的反应，才能得到药物是否有效的结论。这样一来，如果药物确实有效，那么对使用“安慰剂”的患者是不公平和违反道德的。如果药物无效甚至有害，那么对待使用新药物的患者同样不公平且违反道德。但是得到结论之后，这项科学进展可以造福千千万万患有同样疾病的患者，所以是道德的。伦理道德在这个案例当中，界限在哪里呢？请对方明确回答，美国是否应该进行活体实验？

2、请问违背人类尊严的科学研究是否应该禁止？

首先，科学研究过程当中的人类行为应该受到伦理道德的限制，但是科学发展本身不应该受到伦理道德的限制。科学发展本身是中立的，无所谓是否“违背人类尊严”，如果有违背人类尊严的行为，那也是人类进行科学研究过程当中的人类行为，不管是科学研究还是人类的其他活动，只要有人类行为的地方就有道德伦理的约束。违背伦理道德的活体解剖属于人类行为，应该限制，但是研究人体本身属于科学，不应该受到伦理道德的限制。

其次，“人类尊严”在不同的伦理学家眼里有不同的定义，如果两个伦理学家的定义完全相反，请问对方界限在哪里？比如转基因生物，有的伦理道德学家认可，有的伦理道德学家不认可，请问该听谁的？比如克隆人，大多数人认为违反了伦理道德，应该禁止，但是克隆人体器官却受到大多数人的认同。请问，克隆人和克隆人体器官，哪个对人类尊严更加尊重一点？如果强调人类尊严，我们应该克隆人而禁止克隆人体器官；如果强调克隆人带来的社会伦理，我们应该禁止克隆人而允许克隆人体器官。可见即使是伦理道德界限，都有这么多的模糊之处，不但难以限制人类行为，更不要说限制中立的科学发展了。不要说伦理道德，就连法律这种强制限制人类行为的规范，都有许多矛盾。例如美国法律规定：宗教信仰自由，但同时规定：不许一夫多妻。而伊斯兰教义就是允许一夫多妻的，那么到底应该禁止伊斯兰教还是禁止一夫多妻？

StefanaUID: 2143510

It is true that technologies can influence the common concepts and ideas in the society to some extent, but that does not mean that technologies can determines the social customs and ethics. Actually, culture and surroundings play more vital roles than technology in determining social customs and ethics.
As we know, the development of one subject is always determined by its internal factors, even though influenced by external reasons at the same time. Sometimes it is the internal reasons lead to the external ones. Here we can liken the technology to the external factor, while culture and surroundings are liken to the internal reason, for the reason that culture contains certain particular contents about the customs and ethics, such as style of thoughts, habitual behaviors, which directly place a decisive influence on social customs and ethics, and even lead to the direction of technology development.

dingyi0311UID: 2627919

我觉得科技在某些方面是可以决定人们的道德和习俗
一个是破除迷信，使人的行为想法发生改变
一个是科技创造了一些新的问题，如试管婴儿，克隆等

单眼皮vs肿眼皮UID: 2705887

technology VS ethic（moral beliefs）

这让我想到丹布朗的《天使与魔鬼》，虽然很多人说他写的书没什么逻辑。。。里面的关于科学和信仰的矛盾可否拿来为我所用呢？等我好好想想。。。来

kulewy531UID: 2603031

4# Stefana

It is true that technologies can influence the common concepts and ideas in the society to some extent, but that does not mean that technologies can determines the social customs and ethics. Actually, culture an surroundings play more vital roles than technology in determining social customs and ethics. （According to American Heritage Dictionary, "culture" means "the totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.", which is a wide range concept including customs, ethics, and, to some extent, techology）
As we know, the development of one subject is always determined by its internal factors, even though influenced by external reasons at the same time. (It is unwarented to claim that "the development of one subject is always determined by its internal factors, even though influenced by external reasons at the same time". A subject's development depents both on internal and external factors. Without external factors, it is hard to suppose that the subject could develope. )Sometimes it is the internal reasons lead to the external ones. Here we can liken the technology to the external factor, while culture and surroundings are liken to the internal reason, for the reason that culture contains certain particular contents about the customs and ethics, such as style of thoughts, habitual behaviors, which directly place a decisive influence on social customs and ethics, and even lead to the direction of technology development.

kulewy531UID: 2603031

The most fundemental reason is that technology can not be applied to the study of human beings, as it can do with material things. As a common knowledge, the human society is composed of subjects(human beings) and objects(material objects). Since it can successfully explain the pinciples of material objects accurately, technology exerts a strong influence on our society. But because it can not solve the problem of human beings like philosophy and literature, technology can not determine the course of the development of the society.

qisaimanUID: 2703629

this issue is just as terrible as others to me , and I can not take either side since there are evidence supporting both , but the evidence I can image is not so persuasive .
however ,when looking forward to the future , especially considering the more and more intelligent robots around us , I can surely declaim that technology not only influence but also determine the social customs and ethics .
as an example, just imaging a android who ( that ) can perform surgery on us.

but I am not sure if this method will be accepted by ets , hence be careful .

plukaUID: 2721764

well, since there have already so many cons...I'll try to support the argument that science&technology can in many cases determine the social ethos and customs.

How about start from the 'customs'? So the opening question for me would be: where and how do customs originate? Russell pointed out that the very begining of traditions, customs and beliefs derived from ignorance on the natural force and inherent fear in human's instinct. To 'protect' themselves from the unknown, primitive people figured out a set of rites and ceremonies which they believed effective. Such rituals, whose originally design and intention have been gradually forgotten during the long evolution process, have been taken by modern people for granted as traditions and customs, and no one ever wanted to find out why. In another word, many of today's customs no longer serve their designed functions, we keep them simply because no one pointed this truth out.

Then what if some one tells it? Most possibly there be a revolution in ideology. Tracing back the history and we can easily find that it is always the development of science and technology that reveals new pages for human, honing our cognitive ability, deepening our understanding towards this world, and eventually leading to doubt and abandonment of useless customs. The finding that the earth is a sphere rather than a plate can be a good example as it renewed the tradition of navigation.

Above is my explanations on this topic. In short, the dominant force of science and technology root on the fact that those development opened new windows for our mind, provides opportunities to ruminate dubious customs. With these processes, obsolete traditions fade, newcomers rule.

kulewy531UID: 2603031

10# pluka

To pluka:
I sincerely appreciate your understanding and knowledge about "customs". But, as we know, science and technology can not explain everything. Seeing from the past, the more discovery we made, the more  ignorance we found ourself was. To some extent, customs will always exist, hence ignorance.

plukaUID: 2721764

11# kulewy531

Thx!
I agree that there will always be customs and ignorance coexisting. What I meant last time is not that science replaces custom completely,but that it steer the direction of changing customs.
The circle is: old ignorance—>old customs—>science—>renewed understanding—>new known&unknown—>new customs.
Thus the science&technology indeed plays substantial role in determine the new customs.

kulewy531UID: 2603031

12# pluka
I have to admit that I did not understand your meaning clearly.
But, there are also flaws in your reasoning. Customs can not always be evaluated by science. Admittedly, some customs can be easily found unscienctific, but more often than not, custom is not a question of right and wrong. I'd like to take the concept of "homosexuality" for instance, which can not be proved right or wrong by scinence at present and seems unlikely to be proved in the future.