Is science better or getting better?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-06-2013, 02:21 PM
RE: Is science better or getting better?
Of course it is true that scientific study has been, and always will be affected by politics and business interests. That is perfectly normal, and expected.

I find myself wondering as to the point of the argument though. We all know that science isn't perfect in practice, however wonderful its method. We all know that today's scientific discoveries have made our lives better in practically every way possible. We all know that we rely on it for so much, so often. Our food production, medical care, and military strength all rely on the simple scientific method that led very intelligent men and women to create the wonders we now use every day.

I find myself wondering, what difference does it make if some scientists are corrupt, or some research here and there is lost to political interest, if even with all of that interference, my life is still this amazing?

There is enough merit in science for me, more than enough even. I can rely on it, even with corruption.

I am very grateful to those scientists who genuinely want to make this world better. Perhaps if it were not for them, I would have no alternative in my questions about the universe, and would drown once again in religion, with all its lies and contemptible morality.

Surely what I have now is better than any alternative.

Never let yourself believe that there are no errors in your perception, or that your perspective will not be improved if you identify and correct those flaws. -Aron Ra
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 03:35 PM
RE: Is science better or getting better?
Sure, but again there is no more reliable process at our disposal. Would you prefer we build your next car or train based on religious knowledge? Perhaps we'll construct the next space telescope based on recent advances in metaphysics based on Plato's forms our recent breakthroughs in our study of the absolute. Science is the most reliable way of finding information that describes future events in a way that supports our engineering processes and fundamentally our modern society.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hafnof's post
04-06-2013, 04:36 PM
Is science better or getting better?
(04-06-2013 02:21 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Of course it is true that scientific study has been, and always will be affected by politics and business interests. That is perfectly normal, and expected.

I find myself wondering as to the point of the argument though. We all know that science isn't perfect in practice, however wonderful its method. We all know that today's scientific discoveries have made our lives better in practically every way possible. We all know that we rely on it for so much, so often. Our food production, medical care, and military strength all rely on the simple scientific method that led very intelligent men and women to create the wonders we now use every day.

I find myself wondering, what difference does it make if some scientists are corrupt, or some research here and there is lost to political interest, if even with all of that interference, my life is still this amazing?

There is enough merit in science for me, more than enough even. I can rely on it, even with corruption.

I am very grateful to those scientists who genuinely want to make this world better. Perhaps if it were not for them, I would have no alternative in my questions about the universe, and would drown once again in religion, with all its lies and contemptible morality.

Surely what I have now is better than any alternative.

So you believe the results of science has made our lives better? I want to know the ways it has. And how does one say an object is science? A computer is a computer, it doesn't have a science in it that gives it special meaning. Practical tools can hardly be called science since humans have been doing that for thousands of years.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 04:50 PM
RE: Is science better or getting better?
(04-06-2013 04:36 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 02:21 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Of course it is true that scientific study has been, and always will be affected by politics and business interests. That is perfectly normal, and expected.

I find myself wondering as to the point of the argument though. We all know that science isn't perfect in practice, however wonderful its method. We all know that today's scientific discoveries have made our lives better in practically every way possible. We all know that we rely on it for so much, so often. Our food production, medical care, and military strength all rely on the simple scientific method that led very intelligent men and women to create the wonders we now use every day.

I find myself wondering, what difference does it make if some scientists are corrupt, or some research here and there is lost to political interest, if even with all of that interference, my life is still this amazing?

There is enough merit in science for me, more than enough even. I can rely on it, even with corruption.

I am very grateful to those scientists who genuinely want to make this world better. Perhaps if it were not for them, I would have no alternative in my questions about the universe, and would drown once again in religion, with all its lies and contemptible morality.

Surely what I have now is better than any alternative.

So you believe the results of science has made our lives better? I want to know the ways it has. And how does one say an object is science? A computer is a computer, it doesn't have a science in it that gives it special meaning. Practical tools can hardly be called science since humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

A computer is a computer is a circular description.

What's usually meant by saying a computer is science is that the ideas from science were used to build it. (Other wise known as applied science, or computer science.)

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 05:09 PM
RE: Is science better or getting better?
(04-06-2013 04:36 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 02:21 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Of course it is true that scientific study has been, and always will be affected by politics and business interests. That is perfectly normal, and expected.

I find myself wondering as to the point of the argument though. We all know that science isn't perfect in practice, however wonderful its method. We all know that today's scientific discoveries have made our lives better in practically every way possible. We all know that we rely on it for so much, so often. Our food production, medical care, and military strength all rely on the simple scientific method that led very intelligent men and women to create the wonders we now use every day.

I find myself wondering, what difference does it make if some scientists are corrupt, or some research here and there is lost to political interest, if even with all of that interference, my life is still this amazing?

There is enough merit in science for me, more than enough even. I can rely on it, even with corruption.

I am very grateful to those scientists who genuinely want to make this world better. Perhaps if it were not for them, I would have no alternative in my questions about the universe, and would drown once again in religion, with all its lies and contemptible morality.

Surely what I have now is better than any alternative.

So you believe the results of science has made our lives better? I want to know the ways it has. And how does one say an object is science? A computer is a computer, it doesn't have a science in it that gives it special meaning. Practical tools can hardly be called science since humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

Computers, TVs, phones, etc. are built with technology based on very deep science. Polymer chemistry, quantum physics, metallurgy, and many other areas of science were involved.
Devices like these weren't even imaginable, let alone possible, until recently.
Do you really just take these things for granted? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 05:39 PM
RE: Is science better or getting better?
Seems like science has played a big part in medical advancements too numerous to list. From medications to testing to laser surgeries to replacement joints...

Science just hasn't figured out how to fix stupid yet, obviously...

See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 06:27 PM (This post was last modified: 04-06-2013 06:30 PM by Luminon.)
RE: Is science better or getting better?
(27-05-2013 09:51 PM)I and I Wrote:  Is science (observing and making judgements about observations) any more accurate today or better today than it was in the past?
Science has a problem. It produces theories divorced from their original meaning.

The Greek word "teoria" originally did not mean theory as we understand it today, a predictive explanation of a body of facts, or something like that.

Teoria was a daily practice of contemplation about values and uses. What are things used for and if that's a good thing. Greeks associated teoria with "praxis", the practice of daily life. They believed it is impossible to have good praxis without having good teoria.

From this modern point of view, it does not matter whether scientific theory is used for healing people, or for killing and torturing. Science does not make a judgement on values. It does not contemplate that kind of things.

The problem is, if scientists do not do that, someone else does. The society undergoes a process of modernization, it diversifies, broadens and splits and even people get more distant. Just like the universe, society has its own Big Bang. As people and institutions get more distant, they have to maintain contact through some kind of medium. Usually this medium is money. But the greater separation, the greater role money play, until the money take over. They start using all institutions and people to perpetuate themselves.

This is why science is also exposed to this corrupting influence, just like politics, business and culture (religion, etc). Money connect and money corrupt. For any given area of life, you can tell what money do there. You know the lobbyists. You know weapons trade, prosperity gospel, political movie propaganda, cronyism, advertisement, and the good old corporate capitalism. Yet so far I have not heard from anyone how is a corruption called in science. Obviously, scientific institutions can not tell a lie. It is very difficult to imagine even hypothetically how a corruption might look in this spotless white area.

Please don't take it as an attack on science and propagation of woo, but a very valid political question. Science can not lie about facts of natural world, these are under peer review. So how does it look?
Maybe the answer is, science is a sellout. A whore of market forces. A scientist will have a problem working even on the most philantropic projects, if there is little or no funding. A scientist will develop weapons to kill or manipulate innocent people, weapons that will be bought for taxpayer money and shipped to Iraq to provide an outlet for unemployed American youth and drying out Texas wells. I have heard an opinion that scientists who create problems instead of solving them are not "real scientists". An emotional argument, I know, but a compelling one.

That is the problem, we went from teoria to theory. Is there any union of scientists against working on inhumane projects that has any real power? Scientists should be more competent than politicians to make decisions and set the policy. So far the only thing they can do is moving a hand on imaginary clock. However, I imagine a general, global strike of scientists against misuse of their science, that would be a very powerful message. Strikes of workers, common people and teachers are easily ignored. But not scientists.

Viva la evoluciĆ³n!

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2013, 10:54 PM
RE: Is science better or getting better?
(04-06-2013 04:36 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 02:21 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  Of course it is true that scientific study has been, and always will be affected by politics and business interests. That is perfectly normal, and expected.

I find myself wondering as to the point of the argument though. We all know that science isn't perfect in practice, however wonderful its method. We all know that today's scientific discoveries have made our lives better in practically every way possible. We all know that we rely on it for so much, so often. Our food production, medical care, and military strength all rely on the simple scientific method that led very intelligent men and women to create the wonders we now use every day.

I find myself wondering, what difference does it make if some scientists are corrupt, or some research here and there is lost to political interest, if even with all of that interference, my life is still this amazing?

There is enough merit in science for me, more than enough even. I can rely on it, even with corruption.

I am very grateful to those scientists who genuinely want to make this world better. Perhaps if it were not for them, I would have no alternative in my questions about the universe, and would drown once again in religion, with all its lies and contemptible morality.

Surely what I have now is better than any alternative.

So you believe the results of science has made our lives better? I want to know the ways it has. And how does one say an object is science? A computer is a computer, it doesn't have a science in it that gives it special meaning. Practical tools can hardly be called science since humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

I am not sure I understand your question.

I would say it was common knowledge, and even blatantly obvious that the use of the scientific method in research, and invention over the last few hundred years, has culminated in the wondrous technology and massive success of today.

Take for example some of the most revolutionary ideas that came about due to research and invention, such as the telephone, or the internet.

The method has proved successful again and again, and we all reap the rewards.

Never let yourself believe that there are no errors in your perception, or that your perspective will not be improved if you identify and correct those flaws. -Aron Ra
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Phoenix's post
05-06-2013, 04:06 AM
Is science better or getting better?
(04-06-2013 10:54 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 04:36 PM)I and I Wrote:  So you believe the results of science has made our lives better? I want to know the ways it has. And how does one say an object is science? A computer is a computer, it doesn't have a science in it that gives it special meaning. Practical tools can hardly be called science since humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

I am not sure I understand your question.

I would say it was common knowledge, and even blatantly obvious that the use of the scientific method in research, and invention over the last few hundred years, has culminated in the wondrous technology and massive success of today.

Take for example some of the most revolutionary ideas that came about due to research and invention, such as the telephone, or the internet.

The method has proved successful again and again, and we all reap the rewards.

Yes but whether or not the telephone has made our lives better or not is a subjective judgement call. Even science in medicine has only stopped certain diseases but not that many, and medication gets into the water system. The diseases that medicine has cured has allowed more old people to be around longer, not a bad thing however now the economies are having to spend more on health care. Many now say that vaccines can be adapted to by viruses so eventually there will be a measles virus that isn't affected by a measles virus near as often as it is now. Our bodies also Change due to too much antibiotics from meds. Are we better off in the long run with or without medicine advancements is purely a personal judgement call.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2013, 04:06 AM
Is science better or getting better?
(04-06-2013 10:54 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  
(04-06-2013 04:36 PM)I and I Wrote:  So you believe the results of science has made our lives better? I want to know the ways it has. And how does one say an object is science? A computer is a computer, it doesn't have a science in it that gives it special meaning. Practical tools can hardly be called science since humans have been doing that for thousands of years.

I am not sure I understand your question.

I would say it was common knowledge, and even blatantly obvious that the use of the scientific method in research, and invention over the last few hundred years, has culminated in the wondrous technology and massive success of today.

Take for example some of the most revolutionary ideas that came about due to research and invention, such as the telephone, or the internet.

The method has proved successful again and again, and we all reap the rewards.

Yes but whether or not the telephone has made our lives better or not is a subjective judgement call. Even science in medicine has only stopped certain diseases but not that many, and medication gets into the water system. The diseases that medicine has cured has allowed more old people to be around longer, not a bad thing however now the economies are having to spend more on health care. Many now say that vaccines can be adapted to by viruses so eventually there will be a measles virus that isn't affected by a measles virus near as often as it is now. Our bodies also Change due to too much antibiotics from meds. Are we better off in the long run with or without medicine advancements is purely a personal judgement call.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: