why such huge veneration of science?
A quote from Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness:
This is the biggest problem with science.
In the meantime, fools speak like they know something, because they claim "science has proven it". Evolution is proven ! How many times have we seen that? Science enables foolishness
In the past, doctors laughed at the idea of "germs". Doctors would wipe their scapels on their shoes to mock the idea of "invisible bugs". Who could challenge the venerable scientists?
In the past, science labeled LGBT people as mentally ill. Doctors would do unspeakable stuff to these people to get them to change. Who could challenge the venerable scientists?
I think superposition in quantum theory as well as indeterminism in Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal seems to be clear farce. Which is why D-Wave quantum computers do not perform any better than generic computers.
It's a pattern, a "venerable scientist" proclaims foolishness, and the public largely believes it, and much later we find out the scientist was wrong and what the truth is. The foolishness of science can last for a long time and do much damage. Science has the effect of closing off people's minds to possibilities.
Every time? Most people are able to integrate new knowledge in accordance with prior knowledge without having to change their minds.
It was formally defined at the First Vatican Council (about 1860 or so) to counter the insanely sentimental subjectivity that had become popular amongst the "intellectuals" even back then.
We're talking about the trunk of Christianity, not the "branches".
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
It was formally defined at the First Vatican Council (about 1860 or so) to counter the insanely sentimental subjectivity that had become popular amongst the "intellectuals" even back then.
We're talking about the trunk of Christianity, not the "branches".
The First Vatican Council hardly speaks for Lutheranism, or any branch other of Protestantism.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Entropy applied to biological systems is known as "the Law of Morphology" which, simply stated, says "the more complex an organism and the more often it is replicated the more likely it is that something will go wrong in the process". Evolution does occur but always and only in the direction of entropy. That is, that genetic changes occur when one characteristic is lost allowing some other, previously hidden or recessive, characteristic to be exposed.
Copy errors don't just pile up in DNA. Cells are alive. They can fix a lot of the errors that happen.
http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpag ... tation-409
However, mistakes do get through, becoming mutations.
Sometimes these mutations are detrimental to the success of the organism, sometimes they are neutral, sometimes they are beneficial. Natural selection sorts all that out.
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/201204 ... _sys.shtml
Polleux explains that SRGAP2 helps control the development of the neocortex - the area of the brain believed to control higher functions like language and conscious thought. Having an extra copy of the gene "slowed" the development of the brain, allowing it to forge more connections between nerve cells, growing bigger and more complex.
This is the biggest problem with science.
That's a feature not a bug.
In the past, doctors laughed at the idea of "germs". Doctors would wipe their scapels on their shoes to mock the idea of "invisible bugs". Who could challenge the venerable scientists?
In the past, science labeled LGBT people as mentally ill. Doctors would do unspeakable stuff to these people to get them to change. Who could challenge the venerable scientists?
I think superposition in quantum theory as well as indeterminism in Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal seems to be clear farce. Which is why D-Wave quantum computers do not perform any better than generic computers.
It's a pattern, a "venerable scientist" proclaims foolishness, and the public largely believes it, and much later we find out the scientist was wrong and what the truth is. The foolishness of science can last for a long time and do much damage. Science has the effect of closing off people's minds to possibilities.
Scientific knowledge isn't static and it isn't meant to be. This, I think, was 140lb's point in his post. People who think knowledge should be static in order to not be suspect, will look at the slow changes of scientific knowledge as suspicious and unreliable. Science is a process, not a result.
I love science but I do not worship IT and I see it as HIGHLY FALLIBLE in the grander scheme of humans beings in what it affects and effects in human lives.
For instance science creates great machines that are supposed to make life easier like computers that are capable of multitasking but the other arms of science that better understand human nature understand that humans are not innately designed to multi-task and computers, in general, allow culture and the work place to impose an unnatural 'rule' upon human beings as multi-tasker which innately they are NOT.
AND since scientists tend to SPECIALIZE IN THEIR FIELDS (reference the multitasking thingy) there is often inefficient communication to GET IT ALL TOGETHER TO MAKE HUMAN LIFE BETTER, REALLY BETTER.
Additionally, the science of modern medicine as is already widely KNOWN IS overall making the human species more vulnerable to more powerful forms of disease through the impact of antibiotics for one commonly known tool of medicine that kills disease and makes it stronger, as disease is more challenged and humans are LESS challenged in adapting to their environment in this ANTI-BIOTIC TYPE OF WAY.
AND FINALLY AT THE HEIGHT OF HUMAN IGNORANCE AND failure to understand what it innately even means to be human beings, at THE core level of living, humans are relegated to sitting still for hours upon hours at school or work in a life of MOSTLY input and smaller output devoid of the most basic needs of humans to move and connect to other human beings in flesh and blood ways.
Science has no heart or soul to 'SPEAK OF' and that is where science is only a tool and NEVER EVER SOMETHING TO WORSHIP AS TRUTH.
BUT TRULY as people follow blindly like sheep accepting the byproducts of science as holy truth of being, they march slowly to human distress, misery, and an earlier death, as they never even learn the most basic concepts of what it even means to use their mind and body in balance to have A FRIGGING GREAT LIFE.
IN MANY ways, old so-called sacred text that is 3500 years old or OLDER still has better answers for living than science alone has, NOW.
This is why religion in some form WILL NEVER DIE, AND SCIENCE WILL CONTINUE TO CHANGE and POTENTIaLLY eventually catch up with the real VITAL HUMAN NATURE UNIVERSAL TRUTHS AS WE ARE EVOLVED TO SIMPLY BE.
AND THEN PERHAPS science too, will GROW A HEART AND SOUL.
But I for one dam sure AM NOT going to wait or DEPEND ON THAT (for living a great human life) PER SCIENCE ALONE, AS that IN my opinion is the height of human ignorance, as is, today.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
OH, and for the more ARtistic and less AUtistic of the reading audience professionally diagnosed with this behavioral deficit assessed disorder the following two videos, in both auditory and visual symbolic ways, illustrate my wordy points above well, as HUMANLY WELL.
IN SHORT, tHere is Science and Art, AND ART IS THE WINNER BY FAR, STILL NOW, IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT IT even (in balance) MEANS to be human being more FULly and to JUST have the best life possible as human being IN mind and body balance. :)
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
And this is my favorite auditory symbolic one, of all time, to illustrate HOW I frigging FEEL ABOUT THIS TOPIC OF RESTRICTIVE MATERIAL REDUCTIONISM THAT IS STILL SCIENCE, OVERALL.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
I haven't fisked in awhile. Let's get fisking.
Science isn't a deity to be worshipped. It's a tool to be used. It's a method of gathering information about the world. Assessing the effects its' discoveries have on humans seems to be best done by writers, especially fiction writers.
I agree. But this isn't a flaw of science. It's a consequence of that particular type of technology. Like tomato, you are conflating science with technology but they are not the same thing. Science is the gathering of information about the natural world. Technology is the creation of things and processes. Technology may use the discoveries of science for its own purposes but does not have to. Technology preceded science by millenia.
I agree. That's a problem. It wasn't a problem when science was younger because there was less accumulated knowledge (and fewer scientists) which made cross-communication easier since hyper-specialization wasn't necessary.
This is a consequence of technology, not a flaw in science. In fact science is what tells us why this happens: natural selection.
Science has no heart or soul to 'SPEAK OF' and that is where science is only a tool and NEVER EVER SOMETHING TO WORSHIP AS TRUTH.
Of course it's a tool. Scientists never said it was anything else. Anybody who is doing "worship" doesn't really understand it, something that jacoby talked about upthread.
IN MANY ways, old so-called sacred text that is 3500 years old or OLDER still has better answers for living than science alone has, NOW.
Again, conflating science with technology.
AND THEN PERHAPS science too, will GROW A HEART AND SOUL.
Why should science grow a heart and soul. It's a process for gathering information. The ethics of what is done with that information is what has to grow a heart and soul.
Science is a tool for gathering information. That is all it is. This whole "worshipping" meme comes from people who don't understand what it is.
And finally, here is the modern CURRENT version in auditory and visual symbolic FASHION.
OH AND HOW I LOVE Charlie xCx.. WILD and FREE is sHe...;)
AND I DANCE with 'HeRS' every Thursday night FREE AND WILD in rave style dancing AND SCIENCE can't touch that.. WITH ANY EMPIRICAL MEASURING DEVICE, at least not yet...;)
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Science isn't a deity to be worshipped. It's a tool to be used. It's a method of gathering information about the world. Assessing the effects its' discoveries have on humans seems to be best done by writers, especially fiction writers.
I agree. But this isn't a flaw of science. It's a consequence of that particular type of technology. Like tomato, you are conflating science with technology but they are not the same thing. Science is the gathering of information about the natural world. Technology is the creation of things and processes. Technology may use the discoveries of science for its own purposes but does not have to. Technology preceded science by millenia.
I agree. That's a problem. It wasn't a problem when science was younger because there was less accumulated knowledge (and fewer scientists) which made cross-communication easier since hyper-specialization wasn't necessary.
This is a consequence of technology, not a flaw in science. In fact science is what tells us why this happens: natural selection.
Science has no heart or soul to 'SPEAK OF' and that is where science is only a tool and NEVER EVER SOMETHING TO WORSHIP AS TRUTH.
Of course it's a tool. Scientists never said it was anything else. Anybody who is doing "worship" doesn't really understand it, something that jacoby talked about upthread.
IN MANY ways, old so-called sacred text that is 3500 years old or OLDER still has better answers for living than science alone has, NOW.
Again, conflating science with technology.
AND THEN PERHAPS science too, will GROW A HEART AND SOUL.
Why should science grow a heart and soul. It's a process for gathering information. The ethics of what is done with that information is what has to grow a heart and soul.
Science is a tool for gathering information. That is all it is. This whole "worshipping" meme comes from people who don't understand what it is.
I have no need to fisk as I am both a big picture and little picture thinker.
As I clearly stated BYPRODUCT; BYPRODUCT DOES NOT MEAN ONE AND THE SAME.
AND that pretty much clears up the rest of the confusion, I hope. :)
And no I never stated in absolute terms like everyone does this, I only noted the GENERAL reality that SOME FOLKS DO WORSHIP THE BYPRODUCTS OF SCIENCE AND SCIENCE THIS WAY.
AND I FIND THOSE KINDA (which again means generally, speaking) FOLKS here ALMOSTeveryday who cannot see past their 12 inch or Metric rulers this way. ;)
I have no rulers as I am for one AM FREE.. :)
With all due respect, please.....;)
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
In practice, scientists do not maintain this humility. In many areas of science, scientists are sure that they have the answers.
True and the practice is what counts not the guidelines or structures of how it is supposedly GONNA WORK.
SCIENCE does not have common sense nor do the byproducts of it, which include sadly enough, SOME human beings as is now, in our modern society, as artists have been POINTING this OUT FOR SOMETIME NOW in their WAY and PATH of human being.
And artists are TRULY GETTING THAT POINT ACROSS, in fabulous uncensored ways of mass communication now, as clearly evidenced above for those who 'see' it, breaking down the barriers as we speak, to 'make' human beings again, wild and free.
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
FREE AND WILD in rave style dancing AND SCIENCE can't touch that.. WITH ANY EMPIRICAL MEASURING DEVICE
WHY would they want to measure?
WHAT would they want to measure?
HOW much financial gain can be realized from their measurements?
Would a follow-up measurement 20 years down the line measure why they lost their rebellious streak and became part of the humdrum?
I just don't get it...
