The school of thought that would most likely agree with uncle John is behaviorism.
Behaviorists believed that every type of action and behavior should be observed so as to be researched. If it cannot be directly observed, it doesn't require particular attention because it is not as relevant. Some famous behaviorists are Skinner, Watson, Pavlov, etc.
My answer would be false.
Humans are not always subjected to the same limited factors because they
have intellect. They find ways to get by
when the need to solve these limits arises.
They do not let themselves be controlled by the elements but find ways
to get around these factors.
There is no right or wrong, which distinguishes Christian ethics from strictly scientific ethics for a number of reasons.
<h3>What distinctions exist between Christian and scientific ethics?</h3>
The sciences have been and continue to be supported by Christianity. Many clergy have been involved in the sciences, and it has been widely used in the construction of schools, universities, and hospitals. Christian ethics is not a theory, model, framework, or intellectual creation of either humans or the divine. Christian ethics are fundamentally distinct from those of all other world religions. Each ethical philosophy offers concepts (propositions) regarding what is right and wrong. These concepts are either human conceptions or they are said to be divine. Scientific and religious explanations can in reality conflict when religious explanations explicitly make use of or presuppose empirical truths and when these claims are known to be true. Religion deals with the spiritual and supernatural, whereas science studies the natural world; as a result, the two can complement one another. There need not be a tension between religious belief and the scientific view of evolution, according to statements made by several religious organizations.
To know more about Christian ethics and scientific ethics, click here:
brainly.com/question/21842202
#SPJ4
