why cant the scientific method answer ethical questions?

Answer 1

I believe the scientific method can be employed to answer questions about ethics. Hypothesis can be formed, hard data can be obtained and conclusions drawn to answer ethical questions just as much as they can be for any other field of study.

Answer 2

The scientific method tries to look at phenomena objectively in order to explain them by verifying hypothesis and formulating theories that will be valid across time and specific conditions. Ethics on the other hand change across cultures and times and are highly subjective and dependent on morals. Given the objective nature of the scientific method; it is not a suitable tool for answering ethical questions.

Answer 3

Because science is amoral.

Not immoral - but amoral. It makes no value judgements about whether something is good or evil. All science tells you is whether something is likely to be true or not.

Science has allowed us to do some wonderful things. Take radioactivity as an example, the study of what radioactivity is and how it works has allowed us to construct X-ray machines, and to develop radiotherapy techniques for medical purposes. But it has also allowed us to build nuclear bombs.

You can theoretically use the scientific method to tell you how many people have been harmed by any particular action, and in what ways. But, in and of itself, it doesn't say that hurting people is bad; it just says that it happened.
We need to use morals and ethics to decide whether hurting people is bad.

Answer 4

For the very reason your question is not a scientific question. No science questions start with "why?". They start with "how".

Answer 5

Not even scientists use the scientific method.

Answer 6

Descriptions are not prescriptions. Be informed of scientific findings, anyway, as they can inform any decision.

Answer 7

Because they cover very different fields of the human knowledge.