T H E O R Y - O F - K N O W L E D G E

Scientists generally gain new knowledge through experiments. Those experiments can sometime be harmful to other individual. However, new knowledge can be earned through it. Then, is morality necessary in science? or does morality need to be valued in science? My answer is, morality doesn't have a role in science. With molarity, there  won't be a process in science. If scientists care too much about morarity or ethics, there wouldn't be as much experiment as there is today. For example, in the case of Dr. James Marion Sims , many women were being used for  Sims to figure out how female body work. Those women were enslaved, so they had no rights to reject. The experiment harmed them, but Gynaecology was born, which helps women today through medication.  If  Sims valued morality or ethics, he wouldn't harm those enslaved women and in result, the world wouldn't know about  female reproductive systems.  In that case some women today will suffer wi...

Claim: "Hypnosis can make hypnotized people to obey the hypnotist." I believe in Hypnotism, which isn't science. I believe it because I have seen many videos of people hypnotizing other people. Even though it could be fake and there is no scientific evidence for it, I haven't found any evidence that disprove the claim. Since I don't have any reason to say that the claim isn't true, I believe that it can't be disproved. Also, it has been popular since the  ancient Egyptians era, and that  strengthen my "belief" . "Ambiguity distracts the conscious mind." - Franz Mesmer (Franz Memer  started investigating the effect of hypnosis, which he called "animal magnetism". It was first used by the ancient Egyptian for healing using altered state of consciousness in their sleep temples. )