Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The world would be a better place if we lived by science

Options
2456

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Would the world be a better place if we let science govern our lives?


    Would you really put your faith in the word of a Ugandan scientist explaining homosexuality with magnets?

    No, neither would I tbh.

    'Science' is as easily corruptible as any other ideology.


  • Options
    #33
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,415 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    No art,creativity or wonderment. No thanks.


  • Options
    #34
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Sick of these Scientology threads...:pac:


  • Options
    #35
    Sh1tbag OToole
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,973 ✭✭✭Sh1tbag OToole


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I am far from a Dawkins fanboy. His science is worth knowing but as a person he's not the nicest.

    Wasn't suggesting that you in particular are one but its the kind of thing these fanboys used to regularly come out with.

    Some other unpleasant thing will rush in to fill the void left by religion. Probably greed. I'm convinced people nearly always come up with the dislike for a certain group of people first and only later try to attach a justification for it.


  • Options
    #36
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    Right: those who don't want to live under the tyrant of science log off, cancel your connection to the national grid and go and grow cabbages in Roscommon. But even growing cabbages in Roscommon you do because of photosynthesis and ... Lads the only place not ruled by science is with Allah or Jesus or some such.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Would you really put your faith in the word of a Ugandan scientist explaining homosexuality with magnets?

    No, neither would I tbh.

    'Science' is as easily corruptible as any other ideology.

    No more than I would in the word of an Irish priest explaining reality on the basis of "god" telling some middle eastern man 3000 years ago and there's no contradicting "god".


  • Options
    #38
    Tarzana2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭Tarzana2


    Gongoozler wrote: »
    But races are different in terms of science. Some races are more likely than others to get certain conditions or diseases

    Aye, there ARE differences between different ethnics groups.


  • Options
    #39
    aidoh
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭aidoh


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Would the world be a better place if science governed our politics and morals. Straight off the bat science doesn't recognise races. There's less than 1% difference in the genetic code of all humans. That should end racism.

    Science does recognise race though.
    It doesn't recognise the old hierarchical classification of different 'types' of humans obviously, but you can identify groups of people based on population genetic structure - it just depends on how detailed you want your microsatellite markers to be I suppose.
    Even other animal populations can be divided into geographical races.
    In terms of something like skin colour for example; skin colour is widely understood to be adaptive in different light intensity environments (hotter, brighter places dark skin and vice versa for somewhere like Ireland!). It's genetically inherited too obviously. Two human skin phenotypes could also be considered separate races too, especially since there's a geographic pattern explaining the phenotypic variation (generally human skin gets darker the further south you travel).

    So, as a fellow scientist, I'll have to disagree with you on the race thing, but agree with you that applying the scientific method to every day problems would make the world better for everyone!


  • Options
    #40
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Fleawuss wrote: »
    No more than I would in the word of an Irish priest explaining reality on the basis of "god" telling some middle eastern man 3000 years ago and there's no contradicting "god".


    What's the common denominator between an ideology like science, and an ideology like religion? What's the common denominator in any ideology actually?

    People, society, power, control, politics.

    I think we can both think of examples of incredibly intelligent people who used an ideology in a negative way to further their own vision for society, and just as many examples of incredibly intelligent people who used an ideology in a positive way to further their own vision for society.

    The problem isn't the ideology, it's the motivation of the people who use the ideology, either for the good of society, or to the detriment of society.


  • Options
    #41
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Would there still be travellers?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    entropi
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 21,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭entropi


    sonny.knowles wrote: »
    The Nazi's liked science also.
    Took a whole 11 posts to Godwin the thread...not bad.
    buried wrote: »
    Science made the atomic bomb
    Politics facilitated this, it didn't need to be created. It may have been created eventually, but war creates technological advances in greater leaps.


  • Options
    #43
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    kneemos wrote: »
    No art,creativity or wonderment. No thanks.

    Better to wonder at a child dying from infection than to cure it. Better to wonder at the heavens than create telescopes to explore them, design spaceships to travel to them or create mathematics to model them. Let's all sit in a darkened cave. The utter stupidity of the quoted post should be stickied as an example of the worst the forum can offer.


  • Options
    #44
    La Fenetre
    Registered Users Posts: 736 ✭✭✭La Fenetre


    entropi wrote: »

    Politics facilitated this, it didn't need to be created.

    So how would politics have created it if science didn't gladly assist ?

    Like anything else, you can use politics and science for good or bad, it's no mystery.


  • Options
    #45
    sonny.knowles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 607 ✭✭✭sonny.knowles


    smash wrote: »
    Would there still be travellers?

    On an unrelated subject, would there still be burglars?


  • Options
    #46
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 26,052 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I know. Do you not find Spock sexy Candie?

    Not especially. :)

    Diversity of thought, emotion and talent is what makes us able to land probes on comets as well as write literature that can move us to tears, or action, or laughter.

    We're multifaceted beings, we could live by one set of rules, but not thrive if we don't express all our aspects. We're far too interesting, capricious, fickle, creative, emotional, compassionate and irrational to be herded into a single way of thinking, and humanity is better off for that, imo.


  • Options
    #47
    YungKeo
    Registered Users Posts: 206 ✭✭YungKeo


    I'd love to be able to clone a few sheep at mass on a Sunday morning


  • Options
    #48
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Fleawuss wrote: »
    Better to wonder at a child dying from infection than to cure it. Better to wonder at the heavens than create telescopes to explore them, design spaceships to travel to them or create mathematics to model them. Let's all sit in a darkened cave. The utter stupidity of the quoted post should be stickied as an example of the worst the forum can offer.


    The question is should society be ruled by science, and without art, creativity or wonderment, there would be nothing to inspire people to do any of the above. We would indeed still be sitting in a darkened cave.

    Fortunately for humanity, I wouldn't consider your post an example of the best that science can offer. Society would cease to function if it were solely reliant on science.


  • Options
    #49
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    YungKeo wrote: »
    I'd love to be able to clone a few sheep at mass on a Sunday morning

    Oh they can do much better than that: they turn wine and bread into human blood and flesh. Science can't explain that! So there.


  • Options
    #50
    aidoh
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭aidoh


    La Fenetre wrote: »
    So how would politics have created it if science didn't gladly assist ?

    Like anything else, you can use politics and science for good or bad, it's no mystery.
    "Science" didn't create it. Individual scientists and engineers did. Maybe they were strong-armed into it, maybe they were offered obscene money, maybe they had a misplaced sense of national pride etc. etc.
    People make bombs not "science".


  • Options
    #51
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    The question is should society be ruled by science, and without art, creativity or wonderment, there would be nothing to inspire people to do any of the above. We would indeed still be sitting in a darkened cave.

    Fortunately for humanity, I wouldn't consider your post an example of the best that science can offer. Society would cease to function if it were solely reliant on science.

    Glad to see that you agree that wonder creativity and art are all found in science. Which is what the post quoted denied.
    Congratulations on your elevation to speak on behalf of humanity.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    La Fenetre
    Registered Users Posts: 736 ✭✭✭La Fenetre


    aidoh wrote: »
    "Science" didn't create it. Individual scientists and engineers did. Maybe they were strong-armed into it, maybe they were offered obscene money, maybe they had a misplaced sense of national pride etc. etc.
    People make bombs not "science".

    So how would they make it without science ?


  • Options
    #53
    mzungu
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,307 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    In the absence of religion there would most likely be a small grouping out of the Antiscience movement that would become a full blown whack job splinter group(s). Maybe the science movement would develop its own fundamentalist factions too. Some folk will always find some reason to beat seven shades of crap out of each other unfortunately.


  • Options
    #54
    aidoh
    Registered Users Posts: 620 ✭✭✭aidoh


    La Fenetre wrote: »
    So how would they make it without science ?
    How would your computer have been made without science?
    How would we be able to have this discussion over the internet without science?
    Science isn't a set of guidelines or ethics or anything, it's just a structure that people use to understand nature.


  • Options
    #55
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,577 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Science or scientists?


  • Options
    #56
    La Fenetre
    Registered Users Posts: 736 ✭✭✭La Fenetre


    aidoh wrote: »
    How would your computer have been made without science?
    How would we be able to have this discussion over the internet without science?
    Science isn't a set of guidelines or ethics or anything, it's just a structure that people use to understand nature.

    And if you read my eariler posts you'd see that is exactly my point. Like most things in life you can use science for ill or good, it's in the hands of the user.


  • Options
    #57
    buried
    Registered Users Posts: 9,693 ✭✭✭buried


    aidoh wrote: »
    How would your computer have been made without science?
    How would we be able to have this discussion over the internet without science?
    Science isn't a set of guidelines or ethics or anything, it's just a structure that people use to understand nature.

    It ain't some sort of key to "peace on earth" for infinity either.

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Options
    #58
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Fleawuss wrote: »
    Glad to see that you agree that wonder creativity and art are all found in science.


    That's not what you said at all.

    Which is what the post quoted denied.


    No it did not. It rejected the premise that society should be ruled by science, ergo leaving no room for art, creativity or wonderment, without which there would be no scientific discoveries.

    Congratulations on your elevation to speak on behalf of humanity.


    And that's the most bizarre interpretation of an opinion I've seen in this forum in... ohh, the last half hour or so I suppose.


  • Options
    #59
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    mzungu wrote: »
    In the absence of religion there would most likely be a small grouping out of the Antiscience movement that would become a full blown whack job splinter group(s).

    Anti-vaccination and "big pharma" whackos immediately spring to mind.

    Maybe the science movement would develop its own fundamentalist factions too.


    Proponents of evolutionary psychology immediately spring to mind - all human behaviour can be explained in evolutionary terms... except religion of course. That may come as a surprise, until you look at the main proponents of evolutionary psychology theory.

    Some folk will always find some reason to beat seven shades of crap out of each other unfortunately.


    And people pitting science against religion has been raging on since the Dark Ages and the Age of Enlightenment (the first wave, the current wave is the second wave since the Middle Ages).


  • Options
    #60
    candy-gal1
    Registered Users Posts: 6,568 ✭✭✭candy-gal1


    If it means that actual immortality or very close to it will be available to any who want it then Im all for it! :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    That's not what you said at all.





    No it did not. It rejected the premise that society should be ruled by science, ergo leaving no room for art, creativity or wonderment, without which there would be no scientific discoveries.





    And that's the most bizarre interpretation of an opinion I've seen in this forum in... ohh, the last half hour or so I suppose.

    I'm afraid the irony just went over your head. As usual bizarre interpretations.


Advertisement