That’s a difficult question to answer. In some sense I’d say Richard Dawkins takes science too far by evangelically preaching the idea of evolution, and moreover the absence of a deity with a zeal many people with strong faiths can’t match. In addition, more often in the biological sciences there are ethical issues to consider (just because we can do some things, doesn’t mean we should).
The physical sciences rarely have such dilemmas, and the few that we have had (nuclear weapons for example), I’d say are less about science being taken too far and more about people warping the fruits that science bears to achieve their own (sometimes suspect) goals.
I guess sometimes the applications of science can go too far, for instance when developing weapons or if one tries to modify humans genetically. However, I don’t think science itself is the problem. We should try to understand nature as well as we can, but we should also use that knowledge responsibly.
Comments