The new root of evil : Science

Poor old Money had to carry this mantle for so long and be blamed for all the ills of the world. Now it is not difficult to realise that the 'ol crispy' was in fact innocent and framed.

I point a finger at Science for bringing us undesirable things that mess up society. A full list would take too long to write down. Therefore I will just pick the first 3 things that come to mind :-

1)Weapons
2)Surveillance society
3)Social media

Weapons
No need for comments here

Surveillance society

I have heard that the UK leads the world in this. Only today, I was reading from a news channel that 36 million car journeys are being logged every day using the ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) technology. Presently the authorities are defending this mis-use of technology but pressure groups are already on the case and putting forward the argument that this is actually illegal.

3)Social Media

The main cause of the zombification of the populace. Need I say more.

Without spending further time going into these three area , I just want to put my case against a Science that has become one-sided and has the effect of binding rather than freeing us.

It is not by chance that the ceremonial head gear for graduation day is a square black plate. It is a squaring up of knowledge within bounds (a boxing up as it were). Almost as if the knowledge would escape if you did not secure it.

The biggest error that Science made was to neglect the right-side of the brain. Instead we were all forced to only develop the left side (reasoning , rational, logical , etc) only. People who find themselves naturally inclined to use al least a little bit of the right side find that the are branded as misfits or inadequate. If you are an artist you will get away with it otherwise you are treated as somewhat inferior.

My heart goes out to people with Asperger or Autism. Just because they cannot play the false and fake game of social intercourse they are considered to be mentally unfit. Yet, apart for the artificial game of social inter-action, these people excel in so many fields and have so much to contribute.

Rather than spend billions to send a craft into orbit or operate motor cars based primitive technology, we could have made leaps in a different kind of technology; one which would be free and limitless. I know that some of you will say that we already have such technology but the oil companies are killing it.

As I once said on ATS, had it not been for Science (and where it took us) , we would probably be able to take the wife and kids around the galaxy in the weekend. We would even be able to fly to the moon and back using subtler forms of travel (and I don't mean broomsticks !!)

So , do you agree that if Science continues as it does , we will end up being slaves.

a reply to: crowdedskies

Your op reminds me of this.

originally posted by: crowdedskies

So , do you agree that if Science continues as it does , we will end up being slaves.

Certainly we will wind up being slaves for longer. Before the advent of "science" the average lifespan was 28. Now it is nearly 80. We're living almost three times longer because of advances in science.

But, of course, you can say that is also a Bad Thing(tm) because now we live long enough to get "old-age" diseases that we wouldn't get if we had the presence of mind to die younger.

a reply to: TechniXcality

Yes, it does

originally posted by: schuyler


Certainly we will wind up being slaves for longer. Before the advent of "science" the average lifespan was 28. Now it is nearly 80. We're living almost three times longer because of advances in science.

A very relative concept. The 28 years and the 80 years are in fact the same timescale more or less, unless you have not noticed how time flies. I would also add that during my travels in Asia , I often see people over 80 walking up long and winding mountain roads with a load on their shoulders. Yet they have not been exposed to science.

Science is a tool used to generate knowledge.

And like everything else, science has its good and bad uses. Sometimes, Jurassic Park has its wisdom. "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think about whether or not they should."

There is a lot of good from science, but it can also be used unwisely and with plenty of ill intent.

a reply to: crowdedskies

You have it all wrong. It is not Science itself that is bad because it is nothing more than the investigation of nature. You might want to blame technology which is about half right for your assessment, but even that falls short.

The real culprit is nothing less than the human still residing within its basically animalistic mindset. Fix that and there is not problem with technology and no misplaced scientific endeavors.

For example, if an honest look was to have been take about splitting the atom, the first deed in that direction would never have been allowed/done. Such a nasty business for both warfare AND in the operations of civilizations and here we sit, writhing in the throws of it and still not accepting our folly.

again....another thread blaming something/someone else, besides ones own responsible behavior....like the whole crux of every religion, I.E....goodness only comes from god, evil only comes from the devil.

a reply to: Aliensun

You have a point . Perhaps I should have used the word "Technology" instead. But these days people use the term 'science' loosely

originally posted by: crowdedskies

originally posted by: schuyler


Certainly we will wind up being slaves for longer. Before the advent of "science" the average lifespan was 28. Now it is nearly 80. We're living almost three times longer because of advances in science.

A very relative concept. The 28 years and the 80 years are in fact the same timescale more or less, unless you have not noticed how time flies. I would also add that during my travels in Asia , I often see people over 80 walking up long and winding mountain roads with a load on their shoulders. Yet they have not been exposed to science.

Ah. OK. So in your view 28 and 80 are the same, "more or less." Interestung concept. And you saw some people over 80 in China? That's great, but they have been "exposed to science." Just because you can't make the connection does not mean it's not there.

Have the grace to accept where your theory doesn't work. You and the Unabomber must be best friends. And you are communication, such that it is, via science, btw, otherwise no one would hear your "theory."

originally posted by: ketsuko
Science is a tool used to generate knowledge.

And like everything else, science has its good and bad uses. Sometimes, Jurassic Park has its wisdom. "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think about whether or not they should."

There is a lot of good from science, but it can also be used unwisely and with plenty of ill intent.

I agree. The researcher is only trying to advance knowledge.

However, where does the conscience come in ? Your quote from Jurassic Park illustrates that. At present there is an international race to clone an individual (officially they are doing it on sheep). Sadly , the researcher are getting obsessed with it and the question of whether they should or not in not being faced.

It is the same scenario all the time. Something revolutionary is discovered by a researcher/scientist who has good intentions. Then , before you know it, he/she is either silenced or forced to pass information to the military ot the pharmaceutical giants.

Whenever it really matters, it will be passed to to the military.

So what shoud the good scientist do ? After all he has a family to take care of. Perhaps this great inventor will resign himself and say "Science is the root of all evil". Who knows ?

originally posted by: jimmyx
again....another thread blaming something/someone else, besides ones own responsible behavior....like the whole crux of every religion, I.E....goodness only comes from god, evil only comes from the devil.

Even if I sat and did nothing wrong, Hiroshima would still have been bombed on 6/8/1945. Why should I accept responsibility for the death of 200,000 civilians. The atomic bomb was not of my making.

a reply to: crowdedskies

I got something to say about this.
Man without guidance is like a meddling mother in law.
Mostly the ones that drive science to methods of dominating
the rest of us. It would be a great achievement if someone
could lead them away from themselves.



But Christ has come and gone and so has their chance.

originally posted by: schuyler

Have the grace to accept where your theory doesn't work. You and the Unabomber must be best friends. And you are communication, such that it is, via science, btw, otherwise no one would hear your "theory."

My theory does work. I do not know who is Unabomber.

I seem to have hit a raw nerve. Please refer again to my OP where I talk about the shape of the graduation ceremony headgear and where I mention that knowledge is bound as if it would escape.

A lot of people will not agree with me but will still give their comments without feeling threatened. Are you worried that I will disprove some theories ?

originally posted by: schuyler


Ah. OK. So in your view 28 and 80 are the same, "more or less." Interestung concept. And you saw some people over 80 in China? That's great, but they have been "exposed to science." Just because you can't make the connection does not mean it's not there.

Yes , 28 before the advent of science, and 80 now are more or less the same. Time is relative and has a connection with movement. I do not need to say any more

a reply to: randyvs

Thanks for CCR

Yes indeed, who will bring the scientist to his senses.

no pretty sure its still religion.

originally posted by: schuyler
And you are communication, such that it is, via science, btw, otherwise no one would hear your "theory."

I expected that someone would say that. I see this technology (windows, html, etc) as being very slow and not fit for purpose. There are alternatives that should have been explored.

a reply to: crowdedskies

I point a finger at Science for bringing us undesirable things that mess up society. A full list would take too long to write down. Therefore I will just pick the first 3 things that come to mind :-

1)Weapons
2)Surveillance society
3)Social media

Allow me to pick the first three things that come to mind:

1) Improved agriculture
2) Medicine
3) The dissemination of knowledge through telecommunications

Weapons
No need for comments here

Weapons were probably the first form of technology; they enabled the tribe to hunt for food, defend against predators, and, when necessary, defend the tribe against other tribes.

Surveillance society

Surveillance society existed before moder electronics. It is political in nature, not scientific. Lord Burleigh kept Elizabeth I's realm safe from Papist subversives with a network of spies. Russia has had secret police since the time of Ivan the Awesome.

3)Social Media

The main cause of the zombification of the populace. Need I say more.

This is a societal problem, not a scientific one. Modern telecommunications has infinite potential for education, and bringing all the best in world cultures together. Eventually, society will learn how to integrate social media in a more positive way. (Plato was afraid written language would destroy society. Some people thought the telephone would. society adapts.)

It is not by chance that the ceremonial head gear for graduation day is a square black plate. It is a squaring up of knowledge within bounds (a boxing up as it were). Almost as if the knowledge would escape if you did not secure it.

The mortar board is actually a medieval ecclesiastical garment. It has nothing to do with science.

The biggest error that Science made was to neglect the right-side of the brain. Instead we were all forced to only develop the left side (reasoning , rational, logical , etc) only. People who find themselves naturally inclined to use al least a little bit of the right side find that the are branded as misfits or inadequate. If you are an artist you will get away with it otherwise you are treated as somewhat inferior.

Ironically, you seem to think that you are quoting science to critique science. The left brain/ right brain dichotomy is a myth, based on discarded neuroscientific research.

Rather than spend billions to send a craft into orbit or operate motor cars based primitive technology, we could have made leaps in a different kind of technology; one which would be free and limitless. I know that some of you will say that we already have such technology but the oil companies are killing it.

Please explain. Are you talking about imagination?

As I once said on ATS, had it not been for Science (and where it took us) , we would probably be able to take the wife and kids around the galaxy in the weekend. We would even be able to fly to the moon and back using subtler forms of travel (and I don't mean broomsticks !!)

Could you be more specific?

So , do you agree that if Science continues as it does , we will end up being slaves.

That has nothing to do with science, it has to do with society and politics. Some people actually like living in a society where thy have no responsibility for their own life.

originally posted by: dreamlotus1111
no pretty sure its still religion.

Perhaps public enemy number 2