pogi Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 The discussion in another thread about science triggered a question in my mind. I would be curious to see what your impressions are. Is science, in the hands of humans, more likely to save our planet/species or destroy it? I'll be honest, the current trajectory is not promising. So far, science in the hands of humans has brought on global warming which threatens life on our planet, created weapons of mass destruction, is exhausting natural resources at an alarming rate, has created new pollutants and toxins which threaten ecosystems, our own health and the health of our planet/oceans... Does the good that science has provided us outweigh the bad? Many people place all of their faith in science, but do the benefits of science outweigh the risks? To have faith in science unavoidably requires faith in humans. Should we have that kind of faith in humans? Science is here and it is here to stay. The genie is not going back in the bottle, and I hate to say it, but was Ted Kazinsky right on some level?
ttribe Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 Theodore Kaczynski's objection was to technology, not science per se. Your OP launches into a lot of scary things and provides no counter-balancing elements to come from science. For example, the general increase in both the quality and increased length of human life is largely attributable to scientific breakthroughs in medicine. The comforts of your home are largely attributable to scientific breakthroughs in harnessing electricity, and engineering. I could keep going, but really, I don't think you've thought this through. 4
bluebell Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 It seems like everything that can be used for good can also be used for evil. We could say the same thing about religion. 2
pogi Posted December 31, 2021 Author Posted December 31, 2021 25 minutes ago, ttribe said: Theodore Kaczynski's objection was to technology, not science per se. Your OP launches into a lot of scary things and provides no counter-balancing elements to come from science. For example, the general increase in both the quality and increased length of human life is largely attributable to scientific breakthroughs in medicine. The comforts of your home are largely attributable to scientific breakthroughs in harnessing electricity, and engineering. I could keep going, but really, I don't think you've thought this through. Science, in large part, is the seed of technology. They kind of go hand in hand. Clearly there are benefits that science has provided, but my question is do they outweigh the risks in the grand scheme of things? It should be well known by now that I am a huge proponent of advances in science and medicine. Vaccines have saved countless lives and everyone should get vaccinated. Science has saved, prolonged, and made life more comfortable - there is no denying that. There are undeniable benefits of science, no doubt. But my question is do those benefits outweigh the risks in the long-term? I don't know if you have considered the consequences of some of the benefits you mention - the "comforts" that I enjoy come at an environmental/planetary cost. Global warming is a consequence of the comforts of electricity, etc. Deforestation and the exhaustion of natural resources are a consequence of the comforts I enjoy. Other pollutants and toxins are a consequence of the comforts I enjoy. The oceans are being destroyed and overfished due to advances in science/technology to provide us with comforts of being able to eat fresh oceanic fish in non-coastal areas across the globe. Plastics are everywhere, and will continue to accumulate in our bodies and all over the planet. In long-term planetary and species health, perhaps being less comfortable with shorter life-spans is the holistically more healthy approach. Just some thought experiments I am playing with. If science in the hands of humans ultimately destroys our planet and places our species and other species at risk, is it worth it? So, my question is, do you think that science in the hands of humans is more likely to save our planet or destroy it. We have the weapons to destroy the entire planet several times over. Do we really trust humans with this science?
pogi Posted December 31, 2021 Author Posted December 31, 2021 33 minutes ago, bluebell said: It seems like everything that can be used for good can also be used for evil. We could say the same thing about religion. I agree. But religion without science has less of a capacity to destroy the planet and humanity as we know it.
kimpearson Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 I wonder if humans could be humans without science. Our brains are wired that way. The better question might be if there never were humans on earth, would the earth be better off? 1
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 35 minutes ago, kimpearson said: I wonder if humans could be humans without science. Our brains are wired that way. The better question might be if there never were humans on earth, would the earth be better off? The earth without humans would have no purpose in its creation. 1
CA Steve Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 1 hour ago, pogi said: I agree. But religion without science has less of a capacity to destroy the planet and humanity as we know it. Religion without science has already destroyed humanity (except for 8 people) in the flood. 3
bluebell Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 1 hour ago, pogi said: I agree. But religion without science has less of a capacity to destroy the planet and humanity as we know it. I agree that religion gone wrong has less of a chance of destroying the earth, but it has more of a chance of destroying the soul, and which is the worst evil to a child of God? We have to keep our priorities in check. The health of the planet is not our primary concern (doesn't mean it's not a concern of course, just not the first priority). If it was, then the best possible scenario is for humans to cease existing. Even without science, we are destructive creatures. 1
The Nehor Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 Good for humanity? Probably. Without self-awareness and toolmaking our species would probably be gone. Good for life on the planet as a whole? Meh, hard to be sure. Humanity ushering in another great extinction is bad in the short term for a lot of species but in the VERY long term it might be a benefit to the whole. If you mean just our modern progress then I am going to go with “no”. The technology that springs from scientific inquiry gives humans power. Often a lot of power and often that power is concentrated in a few hands. Humanity generally doesn’t do well when it has power. 1
bluebell Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 13 minutes ago, CA Steve said: Religion without science has already destroyed humanity (except for 8 people) in the flood. Religion (the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power) and God (the superhuman controlling power) are not the same thing. If Noah and the flood actually happened, then we can't blame that on actions caused by a belief in God. Religion doesn't have that kind of power. That would rest solely upon God Himself. 2
strappinglad Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 According to ' science ' , there have been several mass extinctions over time and long before man had any significant influence in the world. Nature has a way of restoring balance but we may not like the methods used. 3
bluebell Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 1 minute ago, strappinglad said: According to ' science ' , there have been several mass extinctions over time and long before man had any significant influence in the world. Nature has a way of restoring balance but we may not like the methods used. Humans have a whole lot of ego. We struggle not to make everything about us. 1
CV75 Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 2 hours ago, pogi said: The discussion in another thread about science triggered a question in my mind. I would be curious to see what your impressions are. Is science, in the hands of humans, more likely to save our planet/species or destroy it? I'll be honest, the current trajectory is not promising. So far, science in the hands of humans has brought on global warming which threatens life on our planet, created weapons of mass destruction, is exhausting natural resources at an alarming rate, has created new pollutants and toxins which threaten ecosystems, our own health and the health of our planet/oceans... Does the good that science has provided us outweigh the bad? Many people place all of their faith in science, but do the benefits of science outweigh the risks? To have faith in science unavoidably requires faith in humans. Should we have that kind of faith in humans? Science is here and it is here to stay. The genie is not going back in the bottle, and I hate to say it, but was Ted Kazinsky right on some level? Science could never have been avoided; according to Alma 32 it reflects the underlying eternal (spiritual) principle for understanding and working with the world (I use the term in the broadest sense) around us. When knowledge and its application are godly, our stewardship of the planet prepares us for godly life. 2
pogi Posted December 31, 2021 Author Posted December 31, 2021 I didn't intend this to be a science vs religion thread. I simply wanted to discuss the risk vs benefits of science in the hands of humans. Maybe I am just having a glass is half empty kind of day, but it seems inevitable to me on the trajectory that we are on that we are going to destroy ourselves and the planet via science/technology. Greed/power/pride are too powerful to overcome. I think we have swallowed the creature comfort cool-aid and pat ourselves on our backs about how advanced and brilliant we are, but we seem to be ignorant of the fact that a meteor (of our own creation) is headed to earth. I don't think science is good or evil, it is just a tool that can be used for good or evil. If the second coming was delayed, my prediction is that it would be our use of science/technology that will be the tool that brings about our destruction. Science is trying to save the planet from the mess it created in the first place. Seems ironic.
CA Steve Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 30 minutes ago, bluebell said: Religion (the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power) and God (the superhuman controlling power) are not the same thing. If Noah and the flood actually happened, then we can't blame that on actions caused by a belief in God. Religion doesn't have that kind of power. That would rest solely upon God Himself. You would have to discuss your distinction with the OP. As far as I am concerned, the distinction is only between religion and science, and the former would include God unless the OP cares to exclude it.
Freedom Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 (edited) perhaps it is a matter of semantics, but I believe the subject of this thread is based on an a false premise. Science is defined as follows: "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment" or "Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence." what you are suggesting is the accumulation of knowledge is bad. learning how to hunt is science, learning how to repair a broken bone is science. Science is what has proven the cause of global warming, and the negative affects of smoking. science has created music, brought about the restoration of the gospel, and has prevented the extinction of countless species. science is amoral and is at its basis, the glory of God which is intelligence. it is the rejection of science that is destroying our planet. Edited December 31, 2021 by Freedom 2
strappinglad Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 I hesitate to post this but there are a couple of interesting insights .CAUTION : language ! George Carlin - Saving the Planet - YouTube
bluebell Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 1 hour ago, CA Steve said: You would have to discuss your distinction with the OP. As far as I am concerned, the distinction is only between religion and science, and the former would include God unless the OP cares to exclude it. The OP doesn’t want to include religion at all.
SeekingUnderstanding Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, pogi said: The discussion in another thread about science triggered a question in my mind. I would be curious to see what your impressions are. Is science, in the hands of humans, more likely to save our planet/species or destroy it? I'll be honest, the current trajectory is not promising. So far, science in the hands of humans has brought on global warming which threatens life on our planet, created weapons of mass destruction, is exhausting natural resources at an alarming rate, has created new pollutants and toxins which threaten ecosystems, our own health and the health of our planet/oceans... Does the good that science has provided us outweigh the bad? Many people place all of their faith in science, but do the benefits of science outweigh the risks? To have faith in science unavoidably requires faith in humans. Should we have that kind of faith in humans? Science is here and it is here to stay. The genie is not going back in the bottle, and I hate to say it, but was Ted Kazinsky right on some level? Based on what you know of human history, infant mortality, disease, plague etc, if you had to pick a time and place to be born into what would you choose and why? ETA: I’d say the biggest threat to the planet right now comes from the shear number of humans enabled by science. Secular society is counteracting that by making birth control and other reproductive care more widely available. Certain fundamental religions on the other hand… Edited December 31, 2021 by SeekingUnderstanding
rodheadlee Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 Science most certainly could save the planet from global warming. The problem is the human beings that are in charge. 1
JLHPROF Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 13 minutes ago, bluebell said: The OP doesn’t want to include religion at all. 3
The Nehor Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 1 hour ago, pogi said: I didn't intend this to be a science vs religion thread. I simply wanted to discuss the risk vs benefits of science in the hands of humans. Maybe I am just having a glass is half empty kind of day, but it seems inevitable to me on the trajectory that we are on that we are going to destroy ourselves and the planet via science/technology. Greed/power/pride are too powerful to overcome. I think we have swallowed the creature comfort cool-aid and pat ourselves on our backs about how advanced and brilliant we are, but we seem to be ignorant of the fact that a meteor (of our own creation) is headed to earth. I don't think science is good or evil, it is just a tool that can be used for good or evil. If the second coming was delayed, my prediction is that it would be our use of science/technology that will be the tool that brings about our destruction. Science is trying to save the planet from the mess it created in the first place. Seems ironic. If you haven’t watched “Don’t Look Up” on Netflix I highly recommend it. I found it very cathartic. 2
CA Steve Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 20 minutes ago, bluebell said: The OP doesn’t want to include religion at all. 3 hours ago, pogi said: I agree. But religion without science has less of a capacity to destroy the planet and humanity as we know it. Then explain his post here, since he introduced the term.
california boy Posted December 31, 2021 Posted December 31, 2021 1 hour ago, CA Steve said: Religion without science has already destroyed humanity (except for 8 people) in the flood. I honestly am confused by your statement. If the flood actually happened, wasn't it God (religion) that killed all of those people. And wasn't it a moral according to religion that was the reason? I do admit that science has pretty much destroyed that myth as an actual event in the earth's history. Is that what you meant?
Recommended Posts