I'll ride along with that, and go back to the discussion I had with @frank:Science is part of understanding, not simply ‘knowing stuff’ for the sake of it. To isolate ‘science’ from its real world application - relegated to blindly producing ‘options for what we can do’ - is a fairly recent development: one, maybe two centuries old. Personally, I believe that science is as responsible for the choice of narrative as it is for the knowledge. But the distinction between theoretical and experimental sciences, the call to Shut Up and Calculate, or the business structures of Big Pharma, are just some ways that ‘scientists’ distance themselves from such responsibilities. — Possibility
I'll maintain that science has until now been overwhelmingly for the betterment of humanity; while at the same time agreeing that it has brought with it immense difficulty. Further, science is vital to our continued flourishing. We know of global warming only because of the efforts of scientists, especially over the last fifty years; those same scientists who are being ignored by policy makers.Tell me, how is it that you know about the reefs? — Banno
science has an inbuilt course-correction mechanism i.e. it detects its own flaws and autocorrects its own mistakes. — TheMadFool
One thought which I have just thought is whether Banno, or other writers on this site are taking science to be mainly the physical sciences, or to include the social sciences too? I am not sure that it matters entirely, although if the social sciences are included that means more of a critical analysis perspective. — Jack Cummins
Your question of whether I blame science for nuclear weapons and climate change is interesting. I don't think I do. It probably comes down to blaming humanity, whether it is for developments in religion or science. — Jack Cummins
You speak of the need to orchestrate science definitely there is a need for it to come up with some solutions to problems it creates, like pollution and damage to ecology. Really, I think that any approach which sees science as completely positive is extremely one sided. Do we assume that nuclear weapons are completely beneficial? — Jack Cummins
Religion is no problem if it refrains from ignorantly and arrogantly claiming to itself the right to contradict the facts as revealed by science, the doing of which takes it beyond its proper ambit. — Janus
It's free anesthesia whose ingredients may include leeway around the issue of facts. That leeway is protected though. There's nothing you can do about it. — frank
Hm... Did you check that with Abraham? — Banno
I began using the term philosophical danger during discussion with you on one of your threads and I think that you saw it like a movie, often with a girl going somewhere she should not go. You also spoke of cats' 9 lives and wondering if you had used yours. I wonder how many lives we have on the forum and whether there are threads where we should not go. I also see dangers as being related to untying philosophical knots, and like being in a Celtic maze or labyrinth. — Jack Cummins
I admit to confusion — Jack Cummins
I know that I know nothing — Socrates
Religion is also good.
— frank
But faith, not so much.
Faith here, following Augustin, as belief despite the facts.
Indeed, that is the antithesis of science, since it debars self-correction of one's erroneous beliefs. — Banno
This is a very common misunderstanding of the situation: in the religious context it is more properly a case of faith in the absence of, rather than despite, the facts, since there are none. — Janus
On time?science has an inbuilt course-correction mechanism i.e. it detects its own flaws and autocorrects them — TheMadFool
It seems to me the whole point of the physical sciences is to increase the human population — FrancisRay
No. It is more of a by product in some limited areas pertinent to human health. — Tom Storm
Faith is action in the absence of certainty, and is a key aspect of the scientific method. — Possibility
Abraham's sacrifice of his son is the paradigm of faith in God. It is also the paradigm of everything that is wrong with such faith, the willingness to sacrifice everything. — Fooloso4
Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.” (Genesis 22:2)
...it’s not about God — Possibility
it’s about having the courage not only to act in the absence of certainty — Possibility
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.