1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Science - Who Needs It

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by nPeace, May 17, 2019.

  1. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,827
    Ratings:
    +1,331
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    Science has provided some knowledge many find beneficial.
    However, science has not, and cannot provide knowledge of the most fundamentally important things in life.
    Some have asked: Why did things evolve to form a universe and a planet equipped to sustain life? Science has no answer.
    It is true, we can live without having the answer to this question.
    It is also true, we can live without knowing that the earth orbits the sun, rotates around an axis at an angle of 23.5 degrees, at a speed of about 1,000 miles per hour.
    How does that affect my hair growth?

    Why do we need science?
    It tells how you get colors. So? Do I need that to live? Besides about 8% people are color blind, and some can't see at all. I can appreciate color, without knowing how we get it.
    True... science does help me to appreciate even more, the awesome nature of the designer of our universe, but I don't need science to know that our creator is awesome.

    Okay, you say, but science has done done a lot to fulfill mankind's needs - electronics, transportation, medicine... At this point, I've hit a blank, so perhaps someone can help me fill it.
    Electronics - Telephones, cellphones, television, music players, video recorders, computers...
    There are people who live without these, and their lives are no less meaningful. We don't need these things to live.

    Transportation - from the chariot to the Lamborghini
    Really? Why? Is there a "Need For speed? Have we noticed that mankind seems to be unsatisfied with the speeds that man has reached... they seem to want more?
    Nowadays, when some get stuck in traffic, they wish they could acquire wings and fly out of there. Where is Superman when you need him?

    Medicine
    Let's talk about medicine. Perhaps someone can name one medicine that we need.

    We have everything we need in the earth. People have for centuries utilized these herbs - not only in their treatment of sicknesses, but also in practice for their overall health, and longevity.

    Why do scientist mix these herbs with chemicals?
    What really are reportedly cancer causing agents?
    What are the contributing factors to many sicknesses, diseases, and body deformities?
    Many believe science is responsible to a large extent. So to many, science has done a lot, yes, but a lot we don't need.

    The facts show that while greedy rulers and merchant prevent us from getting what we do need from the earth, most science is used to pollute what we need.
    So why do we need science?

    "But still you use it", some argue.
    We use it - not that we have to, but as a temporary convenience.
    We also use the temporary polluted air, and food, thanks to science - not that we want to, but we are somewhat forced to.
    For the most part, science it seems has played a role in doing more bad than good.

    I believe the things we currently use are temporary, and will no longer be here in the near future.
    The things we do need, however, like the planet's life-sustaining air, food, plants, etc., I believe these will continue forever. Only, everything will be free of man-made chemical pollutants. Sickness will be gone, because its root cause will be gone.

    My point here, though it may appear that way, is not to discredit science as anything but good, because having knowledge of how things work, and using that knowledge with certain advancements, is not bad at all.
    However, science can be put to so much good use, for which it is not currently being utilized.

    Furthermore, for no good reason, but it seems for the sake of ego, to some, Science is a Sacred Cow
    Science is a Sacred Cow is a book written by the chemist Anthony Standen. It was first published in 1950 by E. P. Dutton. It was in print for 40 years. The book argues that some scientists and many teachers of science have "inflated egos" or, in the words of Standen, "a fabulous collective ego, as inflated as a skillfully blown piece of bubble gum". The book was widely reviewed.

    Reception
    Part of the book's thesis is that the general public and students of science hold the words of scientists in awe even when these are merely "latinized nonsense". According to a March 1950 issue of Time, Standen's concerns are that scientists can be and have been "overbearing," "overpraised," and "overindulged". The book was once praised by one of the great scientists: Albert Einstein. An editorial note in the March 27, 1950, issue of Life magazine introducing several pages of excerpts and a half dozen editorial cartoons from Sacred Cow states "With tongue-in-cheek hyperbole, [Standen] suggests that a group that takes itself so seriously deserves some serious skepticism. Life—without taking all Mr. Standen's funmaking too seriously—thinks he deserves a happy hearing".


    Chapter 1 - THEY SAY IT'S WONDERFUL
    Excerpt
    WHEN a white-robed scientist, momentarily looking away from his microscope or his cyclotron, makes some pronouncement for the general public, he may not be understood, but at least he is certain to be believed. No one ever doubts what is said by a scientist. Statesmen, industrialists, ministers of religion, civic leaders, philosophers, all are questioned and criticized, but scientists -- never. Scientists are exalted beings who stand at the very topmost pinnacle of popular prestige, for they have the monopoly of the formula "It has been scientifically proved . . ." which appears to rule out all possibility of disagreement.

    Thus the world is divided into Scientists, who practice the art of infallibility, and non-scientists, sometimes contemptuously called "laymen," who are taken in by it.


    So my point is... who needs science.

    The samples of this book contain some great expressions, coming from a Chemist. I am interested in getting a copy.
    ...[con]verted into energy, and the atomic scientists went ahead and did it with the atomic bomb, and what other group of people have done anything so wonderful as that? Science has achieved so many things, and has been right so many times, that it is hard to believe that it can be wrong in anything, particularly for a layman, who does not have enough knowledge of the subject to be able to argue back. He might not even want to argue back, for the claims of science are extremely inviting. The benefits we have received from it are tremendous, all the way from television to penicillin, and there is no reason to suppose that they will stop. Cancer may be cured tomorrow, or the day after, and the nuclear physicists may easily find a way to end all drudgery and usher in the golden age. Mere laymen, their imaginations stupefied by these wonders, are duly humble, and regard the scientists as lofty and impeccable human beings.

    "The scientist is a man of integrity and faith who trusts the basic laws of nature and intelligence to lead him into the paths of truth. His loyalty to truth is unquestioned: his capacity for patient and sacrificial inquiry is limited only by his powers of endurance; his devotion to the scientific method is unwavering; his objective is the welfare of mankind; and his discoveries, whether of medicine, mechanics, psychology, or what not, are the free possession of...
     
    #1 nPeace, May 17, 2019
    Last edited: May 17, 2019
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    9,883
    Ratings:
    +8,501
    Religion:
    none
    These are generally not the products of "science" (perhaps excluding parts of medicine). Technologies tend to be developed by inventors/'tinkerers' via stochastic processes of trial and error.

    Formal science tends to get far more credit than is warranted for technological developments, which are usually just "people doing stuff". The industrial revolution even predated the development of the modern concept of science.
     
  3. cladking

    cladking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2018
    Messages:
    1,118
    Ratings:
    +152
    Religion:
    not applicable

    My theory is that most science and most of its technology were invented to impress women.

    The only exceptions are where women scientists were trying to make a living, get out of the house, or were at loose ends until the next shopping trip.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  4. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    29,017
    Ratings:
    +12,291
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    The word "science" essentially means "to study", and I would suggest that this is generally better than living out of ignorance. Even theology is a science.

    But science is a lot like owning a car, namely that it can be used for good or evil. The fact that we are even discussing this here at RF shows the power of science that we often just take for granted.

    Since science deals with attempting to ascertain the truth, whatever that might be, to be anti-science is essentially to have us rely on just shear emotion, and we well know what kind of problems that can create.

    I left the fundamentalist Protestant church I grew up in when in my mid-20's because of it's anti-science position on evolution, and I had originally had some thoughts about going into the ministry in that church. But ignorance is ignorance, and there's no way that could ignore the reality of what study can teach us, versus to live in an anti-science and theological "Dark Age".
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
  5. Quintessence

    Quintessence Tale Weaver
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    19,654
    Ratings:
    +12,613
    Religion:
    Druidry
    There are very few things that humans technically need. Humans need food, water, sleep, and a hospitable habitat. All else is optional.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. Brickjectivity

    Brickjectivity Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    25,623
    Ratings:
    +8,076
    Religion:
    Liberal Christian
    Medical knowledge is a product of the rigors of scientific discipline and strife. Its also due to some other rare conditions: the acceptance of technology as good and the physical world as good. Very often governments ban technology, and often religions consider the world to be evil. The Romans wouldn't allow engines to be used to grind grain. Aristotle denounced technical people and their knowledge as evil. The Mayan priesthood ruled by secret knowledge of Astronomy and the routes of Venus. Chinese emperors had advanced technologies that they quashed either purposely or through extensive warfare and policy changes. Pol Pot viewed educated people as a threat to his government and had them killed in huge numbers. Shang Kai Shek lost to Mau partly because Mau offered education to a peasantry that was kept ignorant. Today we can see political arguments about whether to allow Scientific reporting, and we see an inkling of the wealthy class showing fear of widespread technical knowledge. Education improves our lives by degrees, and that is why colleges give 'Degrees'. Science is one of those degrees. Therefore it is, in fact, fundamental to our way of life unless we want to slide backwards into feudal life again, which is easy by the way. All it takes is a single ignorant generation or devastating war.

    Science doesn't try to answer and is not about theology. Science is like an extension of your eyeball. What your eye sees, Science sees better.
     
  7. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Hardline moderate

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    9,044
    Ratings:
    +6,566
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Says the guy on the internet.
     
    • Winner Winner x 7
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    11,718
    Ratings:
    +5,228
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    This indeed is too, too much of a rambling post and does not remotely address the issue coherently; 'Do we need science?' It should be an up front fact that science cannot answer philosophical question of 'Why?' There is also the possibility that our physical existence is indifferent to the 'Why?' questions. It is up to fallible humans to query 'Why?' questions as philosophical and theological questions.

    This where you need to draw the line between Methodological Naturalism and your theological beliefs. No you do not need science to believe what you believe.

    The above over the top generalization and stereotyping scientists, which reflects your hostile religious agenda toward science. Infallibility would be philosophical and/or theological assumption not made by science. Actually it would be an individual choice more common among theists.
     
    #8 shunyadragon, May 17, 2019
    Last edited: May 17, 2019
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. ADigitalArtist

    ADigitalArtist Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,479
    Ratings:
    +7,508
    Religion:
    Irreligious Agnostic Atheistic Apatheist
    Luddite or agrarian utopianism is the fantasy of the privileged. It often ignores those millions who died because 'Earth provides' a lot less than they think. It either has to create a magic land which fundamentally changes the reality they know and/or worse, a casual disregard of the suffering of those at the end of the bell curve 'for the greater good.'

    Raise your hand if you would be dead if you were born back in those 'good old days'. *raises hand.*
     
    • Like Like x 5
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. sun rise

    sun rise "Let there be peace and love among all"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    37,036
    Ratings:
    +13,939
    Religion:
    Love
    My wife and I would have been dead without those medicines. So you don't care if I would have died.

    Well, give up anything science has provided and live like this as you so obviously want to.

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. viole

    viole Metaphysical Naturalist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    9,117
    Ratings:
    +4,138
    Religion:
    Gnostic Atheism
    We don’t need science. And by the way, next time post this in the sky with smoke signals and see what happens.

    Ciao

    - viole
     
    • Funny Funny x 5
    • Like Like x 1
  12. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    15,660
    Ratings:
    +11,079
    Religion:
    None
    Knowledge like extending your lifespan beyond your mid 20s
    Knowledge like how to cure cancers


    Actually it does, its called gravity

    I hear the stone age was pretty bleak

    How does it effect the seasons and the crops that help sustain your life

    Even colour blind you can see the difference between fresh and rotten food.

    Aint science great!

    Various vaccines have reduced infant mortality dramatically, i am sure you are happy your children will live beyond their 3rd or 4th year.

    And here i got bored but did notice you used the benefits of science from quantum mechanics to fibre optic technology to post your anti science OP, do you not see anything a bit odd in that? Or is it that you accept the science you need but ignore what you dont despite the fact it profoundly effects your life.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  13. It Aint Necessarily So

    It Aint Necessarily So Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    5,268
    Ratings:
    +5,402
    Religion:
    None
    Nobody needs science, except people who want to live longer lives (better nutrition, effective treatments for many life shortening conditions), with more functionality (eyeglasses, knee replacements), more safely (smoke detectors), more comfortably and conveniently (air conditioning, electric lighting, microwave ovens, indoor plumbing), easier lives (automobiles. electric motors) that are more interesting and fulfilling (Internet and instantaneous global communications, jet travel).

    If none of that matters to you, then science is useless to you.

    How about religion? What are its analogous accomplishments? Who needs it? I enjoy the fruits of science as do you, but I have no need for religion. I have no unmet need that it could correct. There are no fruits there for those thriving without it..
     
    • Like Like x 3
  14. Nakosis

    Nakosis crystal soldier
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    12,906
    Ratings:
    +4,913
    Religion:
    Atheist Libertarian
    Science is a method of validation. It is a tool that allows us to verify the truth of a belief. The more knowledge we have about what is true the better we can make choices that will succeed in whatever goal we wish to achieve.

    The less knowledge we have about what is true, the more likely the choices we make will be unsuccessful.

    Obviously we don't need to know what is true for every choice we make. The truth can actually be irrelevant to our goals. In fact the ability to convince people of something that is not true can allow us to succeed in a goal depending on what that goal is.

    However if one wants consistent success, the more we rely on what is true the more likely we will succeed in our goals.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    9,043
    Ratings:
    +3,864
    Is this a joke thread?:shrug:
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  16. bobhikes

    bobhikes Nowoligist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,996
    Ratings:
    +1,919
    Truth is you don't need science or religion to live on this earth. You only need them to make your life easier and with religion perhaps grant you a better afterlife.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  17. Wandering Monk

    Wandering Monk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2019
    Messages:
    1,033
    Ratings:
    +573
    Religion:
    agnostic
    Life on earth for humans has improved dramatically in nearly every way measurable. Life expectancy, literacy, extreme poverty, infant mortality, calories per day. Give me some area in which you think it has gotten WORSE since the Enlightenment.
     
  18. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,827
    Ratings:
    +1,331
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    I'm not against science, as the OP shows, but for sure, I am against scientists with inflated egos, who think that science answers everything. There are those scientists, and there are individuals who have the mistaken view that because science allows one to achieve this or that, then there is no need for anything else - particularly spirituality or religion.
    They did say the apostle Paul was rambling too.
    We have free speech.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    4,827
    Ratings:
    +1,331
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    Might it be the case you would not have had the problem in the first place, if they didn't mess with certain things? Could it be that another method could have helped you? How do you know you would be dead?
    Do you care to give an example of the medicine?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    11,718
    Ratings:
    +5,228
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Inflated egos is a personal issue, and not and issue with science. You made an unfortunate generalization about scientists without clarification. Let's not deal with vague accusation of 'those scientists?' who ever they are, and deal with science as science. Science does have self-correcting mechanisms of peer review and redundant research that weeds out personalities and notions of 'infallibility?' over time.

    Of course but having free speech does not help the rambling incoherency of your post, and not really an issue with this thread..
     
    #20 shunyadragon, May 17, 2019
    Last edited: May 17, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...