Did science make the world a better place?

Did science make the world a better place?

Other urls found in this thread:

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Yes

In terms of productivity, quality of life, etc, yes.

It has yet to change human nature, though. A lot of people will always be self centered and amoral, and will use whatever means possible to serve their interests, which unfortunately sometimes includes the products of science.

For whom?

Now this guy's asking the right questions

For who/whatever you deem important enough to consider when asked the question "did science make the world a better place?".

You're allowed to think for yourself.

I think he was aware, he only posed his question so as to cause some inquisition within the readers of said post about how science has helped some and fucked others right in the ass

Indigenous Australians were quite content with their lifestyle of tribes and gathering/hunting before the Brits brought their science. Ignorance is bliss.

If making the world a better place equates to people having a wider perception of life, and thus an expanded ignorance bubble, then sure, science made the world a better place. That perception of life, however, is infinite. So science is just man digging in his nose for gold, but only finding boogers.

No

This is a dumb question. What science are you talking about? Geography? Fisics? And, again, "better" in which way? If it is life quality, it made better and worse at the same time: Better for people who think and are lucky to born in a rich family, and worse for people who are moron and not lucky, like some kids in Africa or some shit like that(I'm not calling they morons...). Before science there was no thing such as "hungry, or poor people" because people had to stick to each other to live, so, everybody had the same life. Now, there's people in very bad situations living a shitty life. But, in the other hand, now we can understand the world in which we live, and we know how things work and we don't pray anymore for water(at least, most of us don't need to), we contruct hydroeletric stations. So, there's planty of point of vews that need to be considered before answering that question, and, probably, there's no right or wrong answer, there are just and only point of views, and the answers are gonna be different in which one of them. That's why this is a dumb question.

Whatever good science has done is negated by overpopulation

Society hasn't and science keeps society alive so no.

Yes and no, it depends on what magnification you view the world at.

By the "World" you mean the world itself or our society and lives? If it's the world itself, sure it didn't, we have overpopulation, we can now destroy the entire world with nuclear bombs, we're destroying nature tu build buildings, species are extinting 300 times faster, new deseases came up just because of science, too(this one is only bad for humans, the world is completely fine with it). But if you're talking about our society, check the
Which is me :D

No. Inventions and technological advancements are products of practical use, chance, and necessity. First there is a need for something followed by new scientidic theories attempting to make sense of them. Progress is made by those working in the real world, not by those sitting in an office.

Science did, humans didn't.

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm

science is inevitable

no

Holy shit. We found /pol/s sacred text

Dude, the atomic bomb bring peace between the most powerful countries through deterrence strategy. Why start a war where all participants would lose?
The atomic bomb is really a symbol of peace. Be sure that its creation saved more lives than it destroyed.

Pass me the joint, dude
*smokes*

P.O.E

Well, technology is litterly the only thing that increased life quality.

Sooo?

If it's a belief system, it is the first one that offers anything to anybody.

It made the world a better place for scientists, and this is the right thing to do.

Why should we conduct research for the good of mankind? If they at least shared our ideals then maybe I would consider letting them be a part of the future, but most can't even think properly and cling stubbornly to their spooks not to mention treat us like inferiors just because we have the wrong hair cut or the wrong taste in music and other petty bullshit. We don't owe them shit, we should accumulate wealth for ourselves and try to buck their system as much as possible.

Everyone can't be scientists user. Not yet at least.

No relevant job is more important than the other.

Human cattle power an economic machine that makes science possible. They have a use. Without them, no moonshot or LHC or any great scientific endeavor would ever be possible.

Science is dualistic, like everything.

It's done quite a bit this week...

The fruits of scientific research does.

Science as in the scientific process just investigating stuff does little more than build up a better understanding and relationship between 'things'.

An engineer makes the world a better place than a pure maths professor for instance.

>If they at least shared our ideals

>fraud doesn't exist amongst scientists!
>scientists don't succumb to industry lobbying to produce 'research' supports said industries new product!
>scientists have never accepted bribes nor conducted horrendously unethical experiments akin to torture!

Yes, obviously

Ignore meme answers

i would be happier planting potatoes for my entire life and dying at 40

A mathematician, just by existing, makes the world a better place.

What is that?

Science is good and bad in almost equal measures.