Thread: will science save us?

Any ideas?
















I guess it's a big question.

Like, "has science ever saved a civilisation"?

Since when then, if it has, have we decided to equate the idea of a theorist-savior with being "saved"?

Have we?

Could we?

Are we prepared for that?


I have seen people make posts in this forum like they have made some type of fundamental discovery that presumably is going to help mankind. But what they don't realise is that they behaving like zionists in Tehran in doing that. There is no "clause" in science through history that in any way suggests that science will save us, let alone some theorist.

I think tthe only way science will save us is if we can equate the idea of science to someone like "jesus", well, you know, a "savior". And not only would that be tough for the physics community to handle, it would be tough itself to "achieve".





Any ideas?

Because, right now, I think we need a magician....well, all-right, I think the notion of the new testament representing some type of scientific code that will save us is little beyond any type opf conversation right now, other than suggesting that the holy grail, that great quest, meant something scientific (and god forbid I may have said that wrong), was meant to mean some type of scientific illumination for the greater glory of the winning Kingdom.

Having Jesus, for example of history, get through to science is a bigger mission than Jesus getting through to the "pop-culture".

Science is not all that great as people would have it. Many people fall back on it when they feel they are being threatened to be wrong. But it itself is only good at explaining the world all around you. For instance in some far off planet where spacetime may be confuddled, its worth jack really isn't it?

And save us from what exactly? All science has done has given the everyday Joe soap an extra weapon to combat the things they detest. Which is extremely evident on this forum. If I use Joe soap as an everyday member of this forum.

I suppose in the literal sense, science can be used to help save the planet from an asteroid or climate change, but it is only useful in finding the cause and the solution of a problem, it can't actually go out there and fix it itself can it?

Its more like a tool than anything else.

Seeing also as you have attributed this question religiously I will try and answer it best from what I've seen here.

Theists here will always try to use science to help justify they're beliefs and to hopefully gain recognition of their beliefs from those who do not hold those beliefs. For instance the 'Scientific truths of the Koran', or 'Evolutionists are correct because' threads, which crop up quite often now and again.

The same can be said for atheists. They use science as a weapon to try and help theists understand their point of view, others use it to attack their beliefs with no beneficial outcome other than anger or hostility. But I believe a lot of atheists (particularly young ones) use science as an equivalent to 'Well my Dad says this', or 'my Mom, teacher, etc'. I've often seen an argument put forth by a theist for an atheist to then quote science almost as specifically as a theist quotes a Holy Book.

Speaking of which. A holy book to a theist, is like science to an atheist right? At least when it comes to the topic of supernatural belief. For instance, my friend, a very educated mathematics student in her last year at Uni. Does not call herself an 'atheist' because she does not believe in religion. You have to understand that although atheists don't believe in God or religion, they use the term 'atheist' to say they do not, yet in the process involve themselves to religion. I for instance would not call myself an 'anti-spaghetti mosnter believer' even though there are people out there who do beleive in it, because most importantly I don't believe in it, so why would I go parading my non-belief around the world. Even if its bolognaise chocked innocent people to death, especially if there was nothing I could do about it.

So you see in essence science can be treated and approaced in the wrong way, as a weapon, or something there to back you up when you see fit. But really, all it is is a tool, to use when it is needed to help benefit us and the world around us. And many people use it to their own advantage, without actually contributing to it.

One example of my statement would for example be for me, to challenge a member like verzen, Q or susan. To go out there with a full scientific plan for an experiment (or numerous ones) and actually prove what they say about theists. From what I see they can talk the talk, but I have yet to see them walk the walk. Quite frakly though I don't think they want to do that, not when they can safely attack that which they do not like caused by their own childhood/adolescent experiences behind a computer.

So science can be used to 'save' us from prejudices, and wrong accusations towards people-preventing conflict, in the same way it can be used to help combat climate change. But, as I have already said, for it to save us, or save anything we hold dear, it has to be used as a tool, not a weapon.

I agree.

Wow.

This is "US".





.

But what if I asked a question that really didn't request someone type of "forum commentary" response, you know, someone willing to give the idea of talking to me a go.

Ask to move it to religion, then you might get a a few more posts from people who stay in those religion threads... :wink:

Asking the question if science will save us is like asking if the hammer on the floor is going to save us. Only we can save our selves, but picking up the hammer might be a good idea, if you see what I mean. Of course, you could always destroy your self with it. Science can't be ascribed moral blame or praise, because it doesn't preach anything, it's just a method of investigation. What you investigate, or how you use your findings, is your responsibility, and only you can be blamed for it.

by now mankind must have realised that intentions of humans have nothing to do with ethical practice of science.