It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If the United States had a scientist as president, would all problems be solved?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
Funny you should mention this, because a scientist just opined on this very subject:


The question, “If I were President I’d…” implies that if you swap out one leader, put in another, then all will be well with America—as though our leaders are the cause of all ailments.

That must be why we’ve created a tradition of rampant attacks on our politicians. Are they too conservative for you? Too liberal? Too religious? Too atheist? Too gay? Too anti-gay? Too rich? Too dumb? Too smart? Too ethnic? Too philanderous? Curious behavior, given that we elect 88% of Congress every two years.

A second tradition-in-progress is the expectation that everyone else in our culturally pluralistic land should hold exactly your own outlook, on all issues.

When you’re scientifically literate, the world looks different to you. It’s a particular way of questioning what you see and hear. When empowered by this state of mind, objective realities matter. These are the truths of the world that exist outside of whatever your belief system tells you.

One objective reality is that our government doesn’t work, not because we have dysfunctional politicians, but because we have dysfunctional voters. As a scientist and educator, my goal, then, is not to become President and lead a dysfunctional electorate, but to enlighten the electorate so they might choose the right leaders in the first place.

Neil deGrasse Tyson

New York, Aug. 21, 2011




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:36 AM
link   
scientists have theories

your hypothesis is flawed


honestly, what we need is one, just one, honest person

I would apply but I dont have the campaign funds or a kenyan birth certificate



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   
Opening Pandora's Box.Scientist POTUS, we are all lab rats....


All joking aside, if we can find a truly humanitarian Einstein would be great.

I think the real answer is that biochemists would not be happy doing POTUS work. Lawyers and businesmen tend to gravitate more to that job than mathemeticians and biochemists. It's like asking a person who designs wedding cakes to drive a forklift instead.
edit on 8-9-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
Now i know that professionals aren't electable, this is mainly due to, if a professional was electable, the US would run a lot better.


I am unsure what you are implying here. That a person is not electable because they are within a certain profession -- or -- they are not electable because its not allowed. This is confusing; actually your whole premise is confusing if you say you practice (or are learning) the art of "political science"


Practically all of the leaders of the united states have been in professions in the commerce field.
Why are there no scientists (physicists, biologists, math professors etc) who have been presidents?
Wouldn't they make better leaders?


Very interesting question. Why would they make better leaders? Just because they engage in the sciences does not mean they understand people or handle management any better. On the contrary, scientists in my opinion would be the opposite. Not people orientated, but only looking at statistics, numbers and trying to find a logical conclusion to a patently humanistic practice.


They would know how people work, how the brain works, and how to advance and bring things foward.
They would make much better decisions than any past president, they'd be fair, just and honest


A politician knows those above all too well. Do you think that many of today's "statesmen" don't have someone on their staff or pay someone to mash all that information together in the best way to sway the voter? To do so, you have to know all those elements and more.


Why not have, a biochemist or physicist as main running candidates? if either one gets voted in, we both win either way.


I am just not sure why this is an instant win. Can you expound on this more?


It seems throughout presidential history, most of the leaders, have made decisions based on double standards, and ones that didn't make sense.
‎"All men are created equal" - Thomas Jefferson,



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by links234
Funny you should mention this, because a scientist just opined on this very subject:


The question, “If I were President I’d…” implies that if you swap out one leader, put in another, then all will be well with America—as though our leaders are the cause of all ailments.

That must be why we’ve created a tradition of rampant attacks on our politicians. Are they too conservative for you? Too liberal? Too religious? Too atheist? Too gay? Too anti-gay? Too rich? Too dumb? Too smart? Too ethnic? Too philanderous? Curious behavior, given that we elect 88% of Congress every two years.

A second tradition-in-progress is the expectation that everyone else in our culturally pluralistic land should hold exactly your own outlook, on all issues.

When you’re scientifically literate, the world looks different to you. It’s a particular way of questioning what you see and hear. When empowered by this state of mind, objective realities matter. These are the truths of the world that exist outside of whatever your belief system tells you.

One objective reality is that our government doesn’t work, not because we have dysfunctional politicians, but because we have dysfunctional voters. As a scientist and educator, my goal, then, is not to become President and lead a dysfunctional electorate, but to enlighten the electorate so they might choose the right leaders in the first place.

Neil deGrasse Tyson

New York, Aug. 21, 2011


Aww!
The US is in dire need of someone like Neil deGrasse Tyson!
He crossed my mind as a great leader, he's a great speaker!

He's so right to, it is the voters who keep voting for the wrong people.
Guess smart isn't cool.




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
how about you elect a Lincoln lookalike from amongst the Hamish brethren

farmers - tick
morals - tick
ethics - tick
not into wall st - tick
not into nwo - tick
wont let fracking continue - tick
care for the environment - tick
care for fellow man - tick

see it wasn't so hard was it?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 


I've had some of the worst arguments with a doc from Salk Institute. One of the most arrogant people I ever had the misfortune to meet. Defintiely not a people/person. If you met him you'd know what I was talking about.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
putz,

we need someone who knows wtf he/she is doing.



someone who is a leader and knows how to get things done.


a scientist has no frikin clue how to run anything cept his lab stuff and no where near practical biz applications.

why should he care anyway?


you think the religious groups would bond? lol, whatever, piss off maybe 5billion people right off the bat?

who did you have in mind, op?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 


I've had some of the worst arguments with a doc from Salk Institute. One of the most arrogant people I ever had the misfortune to meet. Defintiely not a people/person. If you met him you'd know what I was talking about.


True, most doctors aren't in it to help people, they're just in it for the status and money.
Now i said most, not all are like this, but most doctors are arrogant, and rude.
I know what your talking about, i've met many doctors who are like that.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
putz,

we need someone who knows wtf he/she is doing.



someone who is a leader and knows how to get things done.


a scientist has no frikin clue how to run anything cept his lab stuff and no where near practical biz applications.

why should he care anyway?


you think the religious groups would bond? lol, whatever, piss off maybe 5billion people right off the bat?

who did you have in mind, op?




Because no one smart has ever been the president of the united states, the only leaders the US has ever have had, were bonehead egotists.

Scientists do know what they're doing, all those vaccines that cure you, were made by scientists in a bio lab.
All our great technology computers, phones and the internet were made by scientists.

I know of many good scientists who could be president, Dirk Meyer comes to mind.
Well if we had a good leader, they could maybe expose religion?
Im sure there's some secret documents locked up somewhere that proves it's false?


edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 


ya you putz, that is their frigginn job! invent that crap for us.

don't make them a great administrator now does it.

don't think i want to have a scientist as a prez.

not even tony stark would make a good prez.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 

No, no, no, no. A lot of highest ranking chinese communist officials such as the president and the PM are scientists. So, the answer is no, or not necessarily at least.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 


ya you putz, that is their frigginn job! invent that crap for us.

don't make them a great administrator now does it.

don't think i want to have a scientist as a prez.

not even tony stark would make a good prez.


Lol i just googled who tony stark was, haha!

But wouldn't it would be good to have an admin who was intelligent enough to create that stuff as our leader?
We could accomplish so much, if a scientist or engineer was our leader.

Why wouldn't they make a good president though?
They'd know exactly what to do, id feel so relaxed, having someone who know's what to do as a leader.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
Because no one smart has ever been the president of the united states, the only leaders the US has ever have had, were bonehead egotists.


That is a highly subjective statement.


Scientists do know what they're doing, all those vaccines that cure you, were made by scientists in a bio lab.
All our great technology computers, phones and the internet were made by scientists.


Through trial and error. They don't wake up in the morning and produce a vaccine in a day. Do you know how many of our current vaccines have been tested on human subjects that died because it wasn't perfect? Look at the recent revelation regarding penicillin and syphilis.

Which is exactly what politicians do. Trial and error. I am failing to see why you think a scientist would just magically conjure up a solution and we would all be happy. Fundamentally, this is a problem with too much faith in a centralized government applying one-size-fits-all solutions to over 300 million people. It is why, in the beginning there was a precious balance of Federal government powers to State Government powers.



I know of many good scientists who could be president, Dirk Meyer comes to mind.
Well if we had a good leader, he could maybe expose religion?
Im sure there's some secret documents locked up somewhere that proves it's false?


Not the Government's job to "expose" religion unless they were breaking the law. The practice of Faith is protected for a specific reason...The First Amendment doesn't allow us to practice freely, it keeps Government from interjecting in our free practice thereof.

There are plenty of people from all walks of life that would make fantastic presidents. The thing is, the situation is so convoluted in A: People think the President is King and that the King can fix things -- and -- B: That as for the past 100+ years you have to be very well connected.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 

No, no, no, no. A lot of highest ranking chinese communist officials such as the president and the PM are scientists. So, the answer is no, or not necessarily at least.


Highest ranking chinese communist officials as the president??
Well in china i suppose, they have a different mindset than someone who has lived and grown up in the west.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
Academics are usually not diplomats and since we don't live in a bubble and need to make nice with others, I'm not quite sure if a scientist would have that particular skill set. I could be wrong and there could be some charismatic diplomatic scientists out there who have a sub-specialty in global economics, but I have a hard time picturing a scientist wanting to host a state dinner or pose for photo ops in the rose garden.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 


ya you putz, that is their frigginn job! invent that crap for us.

don't make them a great administrator now does it.

don't think i want to have a scientist as a prez.

not even tony stark would make a good prez.


Are you always so crass in your remarks? The OP is asking a question and forgive me if it is some "inside" thing here, you keep calling him a putz.

No wonder the decline in critical thinking is rapidly on decline here on ATS and elsewhere in the world.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
double post
edit on 8-9-2011 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 

Eight Out Of China’s Top Nine Government Officials Are Scientists


Did you know that the president of China is a scientist? President Hu Jintao was trained as a hydraulic engineer. Likewise his Premier, Wen Jiabao, is a geomechanical engineer. In fact, 8 out of China’s top 9 government officials are scientists. What does the scientific prominence atop China’s ruling body say, if anything, about the role of science and technology in China’s ability to compete against the U.S. and the world in terms of innovation and economic might?

Quick, name a scientist member of your government’s top offices.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jazzyguy

Quick, name a scientist member of your government’s top offices.


The head of the Department of Energy is a physicist!

What do I win?




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join