The new root of evil : Science

Does evil imply intent? As in, a deliberate violation? Or does unthinking chaos count?

originally posted by: crowdedskies

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: crowdedskies

Well your overall gripe seems to be with science, but I don't think you know what that is. It's just a term. Everything we do, learn, feel, touch, effect, etc...science. Like anything there is good and bad.

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

War is also a term.

Yea, a specific one. remember learning to walk? That was science.

a reply to: crowdedskies

If I looked down upon technology and the very real benefit that is has presented to mankind I would be looking down on everyone.

So what is your excuse?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Does evil imply intent? As in, a deliberate violation? Or does unthinking chaos count?

I think evil would have to imply intent for it to be considered evil. Otherwise it's just extremely unfortunate.

In fact I'd even go so far as to say simply by changing the intent behind an event also changes whether or not it is considered evil. For example if I blow up the earth because I want everyone to die that would be considered evil. But if I blow up the planet completely on accident it's still the same event and extremely unfortunate for everyone but as it was accidental and my intent wasn't that outcome it wouldn't be evil.

Evil would have to come from a being who is sentient. Although, I'm still not quite sure if "evil" itself could be considered objective or not. It may just be a subjective concept that we use to help us in assigning meaning to certain types of things.

a reply to: mOjOm

Yeah like an innate predatory tendency even to members of ones own species.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: mOjOm

Yeah like an innate predatory tendency even to members of ones own species.

Possibly yeah. But I might even go a step more to accentuate the difference between just predatory and include with then intent to cause extreme mental and physical anguish upon the victim. That way it separates predatory cannibalism to predatory cannibalism for pleasure or with sadistic intent. Something like that.

Because preying on your own kind, while being pretty bad and typically seen as taboo might happen without evil intent, but when done with the intention of including the predators extra pleasure from the preys added pain I think really points out the evil as the added intent serves no practical purpose.

I think that makes sense.

a reply to: mOjOm

What a novel approach. It is that like animals, humans are territorial and are capable to harming others for recourses.

Even if because of what they want is not related to actual survival Humans. As a result of such needs they have invaded other humans territory and have killed humans to gain those resources.

Animals in actually do that because of survival but I bet you already know that.



Any thoughts?

a reply to: Kashai

As it relates to evil, if I understand what you're saying, I think killing for resources still to some degree makes all that killing legitimate. Because there is some other practical purpose for it. Whereas evil actions and/or intent doesn't require any other purpose other than doing that evil for the sake of doing that evil. In fact the fewer practical reasons there are for doing harmful actions the more evil they become.

Evil also wouldn't be applicable to psychopathy always either because evil would have to be aware to the evil doer for it to apply. So a psychopath who was truly cut off from empathy or not being able to process those emotions correctly might be doing things from a position of indifference. It rides the edge very close. But I think for the intent to be qualified as evil, the evil doer has to know the evil they are doing and still do it anyway. Without the capability to understand or empathize to some degree of the evil someone does to another removes it from qualifying as evil.

Not sure if that all made sense and I've read it over a few times.

a reply to: mOjOm

I think it is possible that humans have somehow translated survival instincts and perhaps as a result of behavior also related to animals in respect to hoarding resources. Into justification for murder, rape and other sorts of inappropriate behavior because of they relate in some really aggressive way possessions as equivalent to insuring survival.

As was once brought up but not at ATS, "he or she who dies with the most toys wins". Unfortunately this perspective as stated promotes aggression.

A result of World War 2 was that given what was then the situation, the only industrialized country that was able to process minerals into useful products was the United States. Hence the economic development of the Western Hemisphere which for all intense and purpose today is free of conflict between Nation/States.

What Earth need is an infusion of a vast amount of resources meaning we all needs to declare peace of Earth and begin exploiting the environment beyond our planet.

I agree such a position at best could very be acknowledged as Lofty and Wishful .

But it sure beats standing around and doing nothing.

Further such an effort will require we develop more technology.

originally posted by: crowdedskies
Poor old Money

had to carry this mantle for so long and be blamed for all the ills of the world. Now it is not difficult to realise that the 'ol crispy' was in fact innocent and framed.

I point a finger at Science for bringing us undesirable things that mess up society. A full list would take too long to write down. Therefore I will just pick the first 3 things that come to mind :-

1)Weapons
2)Surveillance society
3)Social media

Weapons
No need for comments here

Surveillance society

I have heard that the UK leads the world in this. Only today, I was reading from a news channel that 36 million car journeys are being logged every day using the ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) technology. Presently the authorities are defending this mis-use of technology but pressure groups are already on the case and putting forward the argument that this is actually illegal.

3)Social Media

The main cause of the zombification of the populace. Need I say more.

Without spending further time going into these three area , I just want to put my case against a Science that has become one-sided and has the effect of binding rather than freeing us.

It is not by chance that the ceremonial head gear for graduation day is a square black plate. It is a squaring up of knowledge within bounds (a boxing up as it were). Almost as if the knowledge would escape if you did not secure it.

The biggest error that Science made was to neglect the right-side of the brain. Instead we were all forced to only develop the left side (reasoning , rational, logical , etc) only. People who find themselves naturally inclined to use al least a little bit of the right side find that the are branded as misfits or inadequate. If you are an artist you will get away with it otherwise you are treated as somewhat inferior.

My heart goes out to people with Asperger or Autism. Just because they cannot play the false and fake game of social intercourse they are considered to be mentally unfit. Yet, apart for the artificial game of social inter-action, these people excel in so many fields and have so much to contribute.

Rather than spend billions to send a craft into orbit or operate motor cars based primitive technology, we could have made leaps in a different kind of technology; one which would be free and limitless. I know that some of you will say that we already have such technology but the oil companies are killing it.

As I once said on ATS, had it not been for Science (and where it took us) , we would probably be able to take the wife and kids around the galaxy in the weekend. We would even be able to fly to the moon and back using subtler forms of travel (and I don't mean broomsticks !!)

So , do you agree that if Science continues as it does , we will end up being slaves.

ROFL

Stop blaming the tools.

Humans are the root of all evil, not science.

originally posted by: moebius


ROFL

Stop blaming the tools.

Humans are the root of all evil, not science.

If that is the case, why give that evil creature the tools. Seems those at the top of the scientific community think it is OK to do so.

I am not the one saying humans are evil. I am saying Science is evil.

Already some have rightly commented that there is no "moral policing"; no one to give guidance to the scientific community. If one scientist says : lets create a human being; the rest wil say : "great " , fantastic idea.

Would you give a gun to a child ? Of course not. But , going by your argument, the gun is just a tool . It is the child that is bad.

The scientific community does not seem to have ethics anymore and must take the blame for some of the ills of the world.

[

Moaning about science while using a computer to do so....
Go live in a cave with no science for ten years and come out to see if you are more good or evil...In the name of science.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
Moaning about science while using a computer to do so....
Go live in a cave with no science for ten years and come out to see if you are more good or evil...In the name of science.

Without science (particularly the way it has grown into a heavy ground-based tech), I would already have the means to travel at unimaginable speeds and would not need a computer connected to wires to communicate.

In the OP , I mentioned that other avenues were not explored because scientists poopoo and mock anything which is not rational or logical.

No, I do not need to go and live in a cave . I just need to remind scientists that they are narrow-minded and have missed 90% of all opportunities to advance. Their resistance and drive to persist in their direction and their persecution of those who have different insights puts them inthe evil category.

a reply to: crowdedskies

So what have you done to advance humanity?.
Like others have said it is us that use science science can not be good nor evil only the people using it .
I notice how much you leave out to do with the wonderful things we can do with science.
I thought luddittes died off years ago.
I suspect you just do not understand science and have an opposing theory which science can not show to be true.
You are obviously wrong btw now let's see if you are adult enough to admit your error in your thinking.

originally posted by: crowdedskies

originally posted by: boymonkey74
Moaning about science while using a computer to do so....
Go live in a cave with no science for ten years and come out to see if you are more good or evil...In the name of science.

Without science (particularly the way it has grown into a heavy ground-based tech), I would already have the means to travel at unimaginable speeds and would not need a computer connected to wires to communicate.

In the OP , I mentioned that other avenues were not explored because scientists poopoo and mock anything which is not rational or logical.

No, I do not need to go and live in a cave . I just need to remind scientists that they are narrow-minded and have missed 90% of all opportunities to advance. Their resistance and drive to persist in their direction and their persecution of those who have different insights puts them inthe evil category.

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Can someone please translate the above? It makes no sense whatsoever. Without the concepts behind science there would be no modern transport. And science is about empirical proof. Of course it's rational and logical. It's science.

originally posted by: crowdedskies

originally posted by: boymonkey74
Moaning about science while using a computer to do so....
Go live in a cave with no science for ten years and come out to see if you are more good or evil...In the name of science.

Without science (particularly the way it has grown into a heavy ground-based tech), I would already have the means to travel at unimaginable speeds and would not need a computer connected to wires to communicate.

In the OP , I mentioned that other avenues were not explored because scientists poopoo and mock anything which is not rational or logical.

No, I do not need to go and live in a cave . I just need to remind scientists that they are narrow-minded and have missed 90% of all opportunities to advance. Their resistance and drive to persist in their direction and their persecution of those who have different insights puts them inthe evil category.

So without science we would be travelling to other worlds at super fast speeds, communicate without the need for wires and whatever else?

Um, dude, news flash, that's called SCIENCE.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Funny isn't it lol.
Science is wrong they needed to do other science to make us all fly around fast like.
Op have you ever done any science?.
Lol.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Funny isn't it lol.
Science is wrong they needed to do other science to make us all fly around fast like.
Op have you ever done any science?.
Lol.

I am not what you think. There are trolls who just like to argue something just to upset and cause fury.

I do understand science, particular the way is was split into various disciplines when it should not have been.

For my part, I am glad that I function in a less than one-sided way. Right from my OP, ,my argument is that we have neglected many of our abilities and potential. We now have something equivalent to a science police. Schools and teacher are admonished if the education move slightly away from the scientific perspective accepted and approved by the state.

Numbers (maths , etc) are the only thing that I would consider worth studying. Even so, the understanding of figures change once you stimulate the other part of the brain (the right-side). I found that learning music theory changed my concept of numbers.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

So without science we would be travelling to other worlds at super fast speeds, communicate without the need for wires and whatever else?

Um, dude, news flash, that's called SCIENCE.

Not really. I would prefer to call it Art.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Can someone please translate the above? It makes no sense whatsoever. Without the concepts behind science there would be no modern transport. And science is about empirical proof. Of course it's rational and logical. It's science.

The OP is not being very specific but he goes on and on about the right side of the brain, so I guess he means communication via telepathy, astral travelling, metaphysical abilities that some believe to have been suppressed because we only ever use the left side of the brain.