The Twilight of the Scientific Age (original) (raw)
Related papers
On the Driving Forces of Science
Science and society are Siamese twins: Modern society could not exist without the fruits of science, modern science could not exist without the tools provided by society. This paper investigates the link between the two, starting from the hypothesis that science develops in accordance with the needs of society; in other words, the direction science takes is not the result of decisions made by scientists but a response to demands from society. To test the hypothesis, the history of science is reviewed. It is argued that at every stage of the development of society-from the hunter-gatherer to the nomadic herder, agricultural, feudal and capitalist stage-the new needs of society led to new scientific concepts. Private ownership of animals brought the invention of numbers, the need for a calendar for agriculture the development of the position value system; the rise of Greek democracy demanded rational thought and brought the separation of science from religion; Muslim empire building brought the new mathematics; merchant capitalism brought colonialism and with it the classification of species and evolution; and modern capitalism subjugates science under the search for profit. The role of the individual in the process is discussed. Evidence is noted that science may enter a transition from supporting profit-driven enterprise to focusing on protection of the environment.
Reflection on the Nature of Science: A Critical View
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 2021
People are delighted by scientific discoveries and inventions. However, absurdity occurs through man's extremities and discontentments. The inquiry and excessive activities of man depleted nature leading it to a devastating end. Man has been enslaved of his illusion and has become a victim of his futile ambition. This paper will investigate the nature and discoveries of science, a clash on man's methodologies, proof of God's existence, and consequences of man's activities that contain absurdity. The inquiry and excessive activities of man are found absurd. Man is really enslaved by his illusion and has become desirous of his endless ambition. The will of man tends not only to create his own image but also threatens the condition of humanity.
Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science IX, Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, 1995
It is generally believed that science is a good thing. (I use the term "science", in this paper, to include not only the natural sciences, but also the social sciences and the humanities.) Many people-and, in particular, most scientists-seem to take it for granted that scientific knowledge is valuable for its own sake. In addition, scientific research has very important social effects, and while some of these are generally held to be bad or neutral, I think the predominant view is that the total impact of science on society is positive rather than negative. After all, we do spend a lot of money on science, and scientists have a lot of prestige in our society. This might be explained by the assumption that most people think that science is valuable. (This ought to be the correct explanation, at least in a democracy.) But is the belief true? Is science, on the whole, good or bad? This is the problem I want to discuss in the present paper. 1 Most people would agree that so far science has had some positive as well as some negative effects. For example, it has given us electricity, which may be used to make our lives more comfortable, but it has also given us terrible weapons, which may one day put an end to our very existence. Einstein once described the situation as follows: Penetrating research and keen scientific work have often had tragic implications for mankind, producing, on the one hand, inventions which liberated man from exhausting physical labor, making his life easier and richer; but on the other hand, introducing a grave restlessness into his life, making him a slave to his technological environment, and-most catastrophic of all-creating the means for his own mass destruction. 2 Most people would accept this statement. However, there may be some disagreement over other alleged effects of science. For example, some people may claim that only certain natural sciences, like physics and chemistry, can have negative effects, and that other sciences (including, in particular, the humanities) have only good effects, in addition to being valuable for 1 This paper partly derives from a talk given in January 1990 to a seminar on "Humanistic Aspects of Scientific and Technological Progress" at the Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Moscow. I am grateful to the participants for many helpful comments. I also wish to thank Hans Mathlein, Torbjörn Tännsjö, and Jan Österberg of Stockholm University for comments on the first written version.
Dialogue and Universalism, no. 3, 2012, pp. 39-63., 2012
We are in a state of impending crisis. And the fault lies in part with academia. For two centuries or so, academia has been devoted to the pursuit of knowledge and technological know-how. This has enormously increased our power to act which has, in turn, brought us both all the great benefits of the modern world and the crises we now face. Modern science and technology have made possible modern industry and agriculture, the explosive growth of the world’s population, global warming, modern armaments and the lethal character of modern warfare, destruction of natural habitats and rapid extinction of species, immense inequalities of wealth and power across the globe, pollution of earth, sea and air, even the aids epidemic (aids being spread by modern travel). All these global problems have arisen because some of us have acquired unprecedented powers to act, via science and technology, without also acquiring the capacity to act wisely. We urgently need to bring about a revolution in universities so that the basic intellectual aim becomes, not knowledge merely, but rather wisdom – wisdom being the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself and others, thus including knowledge and technological know-how, but much else besides. The revolution we require would put problems of living at the heart of the academic enterprise, the pursuit of knowledge emerging out of, and feeding back into, the fundamental intellectual activity of proposing and critically assessing possible actions, policies, political programmes, from the standpoint of their capacity to help solve problems of living. This revolution would affect almost every branch and aspect of academic inquiry.
History and Philosophy of Science : An Analysis
Science becomes an important perspective in human life. Without science, people are difficult to move forwards and develop their ideas towards quality life. However, religious perspective plays the role in encouraging and guiding people into correct path, especially towards environmental. Therefore, human required development in science and technology, and include the religious perspective in sustaining environmental from destruction.
Constellations
Traditionally, the Scientific Revolution has been portrayed as an era in history when new developments in fields of ‘scientific’ thought eclipsed the long-held notions presented by religion and philosophy. Historical interpretations subscribing to this view have often presented the Scientific Revolution as a time when significant changes occurred in the way societies understood their world. These historical analyses have focused on a limited suite of ideas – the iconic figures of the Scientific Revolution, the intellectual, methodological and theoretical developments of the era and the shift away from antiquated worldviews. Owing to the decidedly intellectual foci of these investigations, the Scientific Revolution, and the influential figures therein, are depicted as the impetus for modern thought and society as we know it today. However, in recent decades, historical studies of the Scientific Revolution have shifted away from investigations emphasizing the supposedly progressive na...
Impact of Science and Scientific Worldview on Man: A Critical Review
As it relates to man, the conscious subject of scientific exploits, science could be a positive and/or a negative device in the course of nature. In so far as it rises to the occasion of the imperative of stewardship “till the earth”, it remains a good news to man. But when and where it reflects the Cartesian inspiration of turning men into “lords and possessors of nature” it constitutes a lethal tool against humanity. Consequently, at the various levels of the physical, intellectual and metaphysical realms, it is not difficult to isolate a plethora of positive constitutions of science as well as an enormity of its disservice to humanity. Indeed, no genuine history and/or records of the world’s progress and civilization can ignore the details and protocols of the scientific method without becoming disreputable. And none can “sanctify” all of science’s interventions without turning into a heresy of history. Science had volunteered great bangs in electricity, automobile and computer engineering, informatics and architecture, aeronautic and naval engineering to mention a few. It has provided sundry remedy to diseases through medical researches. Yet it has also bequetted to humanity an ensemble of violence and war, a culture of death and a godless world of unbelief. This essay sings the redemption song of science and men of science, it praises the dominion of science but cautious against a looming sumersualt into a fettered world of violence and death. What it recommends is for the education and repositioning of science back its proper and pristine complementary paradigm of reality. In all, it makes a case for re-rooting science into its Christian origins where the laws of science are but a natural revelation of the “mystery” behind the universe, where the inspiration is “to till the earth” than “to subdue it” and where the ethical perspective of science are prior to the marvel’s of its “actions”
Scientific thought and its burdens : an essay in the history and philosophy of science
2000
Scientific Thought and Its Burdens: An Essay in the History and Philosophy of Science investigates how the concept of science is understood. The main thesis defended is that scientific activities, like all human activities, are the product of a certain mentality. After this thesis is put forward, an answer is sought to the question: what kind of mentality is scientific thought the product of? Current theories of science have tried to answer this question either from an epistemological (e.g. David Hull and to some extent Karl Popper), sociological (Robert K. Merton) or historical (Thomas Kuhn) point of view. However, when we examine the characteristics of scientific thought in the history of civilisation, we see that all three of these aspects have shaped scientific thought. This requires the concept of science to be analysed from these three aspects and defined in this way. This work has first tried to reveal how the first aspect can be formed with the epistemology of science and how the second aspect affects science as a mentality with the sociology of science. Then, three civilizations were taken as a field research and the historical aspect was tried to be revealed: Ancient Greek, Islamic and Western civilisations. Thus, by reaching a general definition of science, the concepts of scientific consciousness, scientific tradition, scientific thought and scientific society were tried to be explained.