Science is a process, not an answer. What happens with the knowledge discovered by science is the responsibility of society as a whole, although as we know not all voices are equal.

This doesn't mean science operates without ethics; these are a vital part of good science and all scientists work within an ethical framework and of course these ethics are influenced by the prevailing ethical trends of the time. To a large degree they are self-imposed but scientists who operate outside of the wide ethical framework of their discipline would very quickly be seen as pariahs and become quite isolated.


"It seems to me that interaction among all disciplines, is essential."

Taking ethics out of the equation (see above), I think the real issue here is the presence of fundamentalist elements within science and the various religions, especially the monotheistic ones. There are many scientists with deeply held religious convictions, but how they reconcile the two I don't know. I have my own feelings on the matter but I'm not sure they are relevant here.

One of the good things about science is it doesn't matter what your creed or nationality is, scientists tend to be rather enthusiastic about the work they're doing and openness and co-operation is key to this work, so in many cases subject such as politics and religion are rarely raised between colleagues. To my mind this is a very good thing as religion especially is a divisive subject and promotes conflict in many ways, as the world views of adherents tend to be inviolate to themselves and some views are unchallengeable - the total opposite of a scientist who actively seeks to challenge their views.