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.
What does science ultimately hope to accomplish?
page: 2share:
We will never know all there is to be known, for as our knowledge increases, so does the number of questions demanding answers.
Science is like evolution. It has no motive power of its own and no ultimate objective. It progresses through the action of external forces – social forces – and the impetus of human curiosity. It has no goal, other than that of learning and discovery.
Science is like evolution. It has no motive power of its own and no ultimate objective. It progresses through the action of external forces – social forces – and the impetus of human curiosity. It has no goal, other than that of learning and discovery.
Alright, here's my opnion on this subject.
I believe science is unconsciously or subconsciously looking for God. The scientists are too afraid of losing their credibility to admit this, but they know somewhere deep down inside that they are either looking for or hoping to develop the technology to become God.
I think the future of science and technology has a lot of discoveries to be made in geo-engineering but this task is one that will also require a deep knowledge of cause and effect. Inversely, military organizations are making leaps and bounds in advanced weaponry, but as you can see, these are equal and opposite technological paths.
But I definitely don't think science stops there. I just think that's Earth's more immediate scientific future.
As you can see, technology has a good and a dark side and it seems to me that we are pawns in a game being played by higher forces that science may not ever understand. I don't think science will understand because science relies on directly observable evidence, when all that is available for observation is the effect that these higher forces have when they interact with this physical universe. Such indirect observations include things like what I mentioned above... how our knowledge can be used to develop more and more powerful creations operating on both sides of the dualistic fence of good and evil.
In fact, I foresee our technological achievements becoming so advanced that if in 10,000 years, we have the ability to travel back to this day, we here now would interpret our future selves as being Gods. Think about how magnificent we are becoming. You don't think there is a God? I say we fit the description and that is what the goal of science is.
- OP
I believe science is unconsciously or subconsciously looking for God. The scientists are too afraid of losing their credibility to admit this, but they know somewhere deep down inside that they are either looking for or hoping to develop the technology to become God.
I think the future of science and technology has a lot of discoveries to be made in geo-engineering but this task is one that will also require a deep knowledge of cause and effect. Inversely, military organizations are making leaps and bounds in advanced weaponry, but as you can see, these are equal and opposite technological paths.
But I definitely don't think science stops there. I just think that's Earth's more immediate scientific future.
As you can see, technology has a good and a dark side and it seems to me that we are pawns in a game being played by higher forces that science may not ever understand. I don't think science will understand because science relies on directly observable evidence, when all that is available for observation is the effect that these higher forces have when they interact with this physical universe. Such indirect observations include things like what I mentioned above... how our knowledge can be used to develop more and more powerful creations operating on both sides of the dualistic fence of good and evil.
In fact, I foresee our technological achievements becoming so advanced that if in 10,000 years, we have the ability to travel back to this day, we here now would interpret our future selves as being Gods. Think about how magnificent we are becoming. You don't think there is a God? I say we fit the description and that is what the goal of science is.
- OP
edit on 12-12-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-12-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason
given)
Science is simply a method of asking questions that can be framed and answered according to a specific subject/object metaphysics.
The major existential questions simply cannot be framed in this limited format.
The major existential questions simply cannot be framed in this limited format.
reply to post by GR1ill3d
OK, GR,
You do not know what started the whole thing.
Neither does anyone else. And they never will.
Funny, I always get attacked - maybe because what I say touches a nerve?
OK, GR,
You do not know what started the whole thing.
Neither does anyone else. And they never will.
Funny, I always get attacked - maybe because what I say touches a nerve?
Originally posted by smithjustinb
I'm curious to know what you all think science's ultimate discovery would be and what kind of change you hope it would bring about.
It is all about the second word in your sentence. First off science is not a thing as much as it is a methodology. It is a method of disproof actual. A lot of people think is a method of proof. It is not. First something is witnessed. Then ideas are thought up to explain what was observed. This is called a hypothesis. The person who has the hypothesis then attempts to disprove it. He/She will make predictions using the hypothesis and then test to see if the predictions to see if the hypothesis can stand up to these tests. If the person/group that came up with the hypothesis cannot disprove that hypothesis he/she/they will publish it as a theory. It is now up to the general community to try and disprove the theory. More predictions and test. If the general community cannot disprove it over an extended amount of time the it will start to be used and will not be called a law. At any point a new test on predictions can invalidate a hypothesis/theory/law. At this point it goes back to the beginning and if the originator is still curious on the subject he/she/they will modify the hypothesis and start again.
Yes it is to find god if that is what you are curious about. But that is not the only thing to be curious about.
edit on 12/12/11 by
remembering because: text size was too small for me to read
reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone
And neither do you, you didn't touch a nerve I was just pointing out some minor flaws in your arguments.
Science has a far better understanding on where it all came from then just blanket statements that come from religious texts and scriptures.
And neither do you, you didn't touch a nerve I was just pointing out some minor flaws in your arguments.
Science has a far better understanding on where it all came from then just blanket statements that come from religious texts and scriptures.
edit on 12/12/1111 by GR1ill3d because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
My 'arrogant statements' are my truth. It is not arrogant to tell the truth.
No, but pretending your opinion "is" truth is arrogant. You claim there's a creator? Ok - show me evidence of it. Ask it to show itself, present itself. And no, snowflakes and pretty flowers are not evidence of a creator.
You don't have to believe in science if you don't want to. But the next time you get sick or require immediate medical help - think about how science helped to create the antibiotics, medicines and knowledge of human anatomy that make you well again.
edit on 12-12-2011 by noonebutme because:
(no reason given)
Reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone
the formation and evolution of the Solar System is estimated to have begun 4.568 billion years ago with the gravitational collapse of a small part of a giant molecular cloud. Most of the collapsing mass collected in the centre, forming the Sun, while the rest flattened into a protoplanetary disk out of which the planets, moons, asteroids, and other small Solar System bodies formed. -wikipedia-
about god.. We'll agree to disagree. Full stop
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
the formation and evolution of the Solar System is estimated to have begun 4.568 billion years ago with the gravitational collapse of a small part of a giant molecular cloud. Most of the collapsing mass collected in the centre, forming the Sun, while the rest flattened into a protoplanetary disk out of which the planets, moons, asteroids, and other small Solar System bodies formed. -wikipedia-
about god.. We'll agree to disagree. Full stop
edit on 12-12-2011 by strafgod because: (no reason given)
reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone
What a strange thing to say. No, nothing you say really "touches a nerve". But you are making statements that make no sense."And we never will(know the truth)" about what? How do you know we will never know? What if we found out and it didnt need god? Would you accept it?
Funny, I always get attacked - maybe because what I say touches a nerve?
What a strange thing to say. No, nothing you say really "touches a nerve". But you are making statements that make no sense."And we never will(know the truth)" about what? How do you know we will never know? What if we found out and it didnt need god? Would you accept it?
reply to post by smithjustinb
smith,
Thanks for a brilliant post.
Wow, a lot of thinking has gone into that.
We will never get there.
smith,
Thanks for a brilliant post.
Wow, a lot of thinking has gone into that.
We will never get there.
Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
You do not know what started the whole thing.
Neither does anyone else. And they never will
Funny, I always get attacked - maybe because what I say touches a nerve?
No, it's because you're continually copping out and using some unknown "Creator" as your reference point. You're bringing in this notion that everything has a creator - and logically, rationally, it makes no sense. Hencse why you feel people are attacking you. Which they aren't - they're merely arguing their opinions against your opinion. (not truth - you opinion isn't truth to anyone but you)
reply to post by noonebutme
I suppose if you dont take it upon yourself to redefine "truth" then it isn't even that. The truth is the truth. Opinions of madmen and religious zealots change nothing.
(not truth - you opinion isn't truth to anyone but you)
I suppose if you dont take it upon yourself to redefine "truth" then it isn't even that. The truth is the truth. Opinions of madmen and religious zealots change nothing.
reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone
Funnily enough, people are trying to help you to be more open-minded. Frankly, I'm worried that you majored in philosophy and display such a lack of insight and ability to be able to argue and take on ideas that might conflict with your own. Where did you get the impression that I was trying to put you down? People like you are scary, it's as if you live in a bubble of your creation and are actually _scared_ for anything to penetrate this defense.
Funnily enough, people are trying to help you to be more open-minded. Frankly, I'm worried that you majored in philosophy and display such a lack of insight and ability to be able to argue and take on ideas that might conflict with your own. Where did you get the impression that I was trying to put you down? People like you are scary, it's as if you live in a bubble of your creation and are actually _scared_ for anything to penetrate this defense.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
I believe science is unconsciously or subconsciously looking for God. The scientists are too afraid of losing their credibility to admit this, but they know somewhere deep down inside that they are either looking for or hoping to develop the technology to become God.
god is not the end all be all.
it's a word for a concept that has yet to be identified by modern methods, whereas it was created by ancient thoughts
which has proven to be right, more times than not? modern methods.
why does the realm of thinking revolve around a god?
especially since that idea was created by a much lower intelligence.
human minds aren't going to grasp the amazing concept of a universe with no beginning or end, in homeostasis for eternity, unless we see this place for what it is.
edit on 12-12-2011 by yourmaker because: (no reason given)
To all you people who hate me,
I am relieved, because I realise that I am not like you.
I have an open mind.
And a brain.
Also, you hate me for a reason - and that reason is because I am saying something you hate - the truth.
I am relieved, because I realise that I am not like you.
I have an open mind.
And a brain.
Also, you hate me for a reason - and that reason is because I am saying something you hate - the truth.
Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
To all you people who hate me,
I am relieved, because I realise that I am not like you.
I have an open mind.
And a brain.
Also, you hate me for a reason - and that reason is because I am saying something you hate - the truth.
no one friggin hates you, quit deluding yourself. this is conversation, we're trying to get the best answers out of you from your distinct intellect background, thats it. nothing more, we aren't hellspawn trying to troll you into crying yourself to sleep. if you see something wrong with an idea we are presenting then say something.
it's how i'm treating you, it's not personal, it's me trying to gauge your brain for ideas
edit on 12-12-2011 by yourmaker because: (no reason
given)
reply to post by yourmaker
I think this is a great statement. It really is true as well.
"As long as Zeus creates the lightening then we dont need to know anything else."
And it is true. As long as we slap superstition and metaphysics on concepts then we will not understand what is truly going on.
Thankfully, that trend seems to be well on its way out the door. For good.
human minds aren't going to grasp the amazing concept of a universe with no beginning or end, in homeostasis for eternity, unless we see this place for what it is.
I think this is a great statement. It really is true as well.
"As long as Zeus creates the lightening then we dont need to know anything else."
And it is true. As long as we slap superstition and metaphysics on concepts then we will not understand what is truly going on.
Thankfully, that trend seems to be well on its way out the door. For good.
reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone
You just said that no one will know the truth...
Also, you hate me for a reason - and that reason is because I am saying something you hate - the truth.
You just said that no one will know the truth...
Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
To all you people who hate me,
I am relieved, because I realise that I am not like you.
I have an open mind.
And a brain.
Also, you hate me for a reason - and that reason is because I am saying something you hate - the truth.
No actually if anything you have a closed mind. I am open to the idea that there MIGHT be a creator. But I am also open to the idea that there is no creator. You are only open to the idea that there HAS to be a creator, and nothing we say or nothing science can say will change that.
DENY IGNORANCE.