4 ms·
Science is a pursuit of relating physical effects with causes, without consideration of ultimate consequences of such knowledge and its applications. In contras
by zkmon 6y ago
Science is a pursuit of relating physical effects with causes, without consideration of ultimate consequences of such knowledge and its applications. In contrast, other animals just focus on their biological needs and don't care about understanding, using or influencing their surroundings and changes in it, beyond what is needed for their basic survival needs. All scientific achievements were unnecessary for the goals of human survival and evolution.
- yters 6y agoand thus scientism ultimately eliminates science
- zkmon 6y agoThere was a story in panchatantra series (Indian folklore). Four brothers with extra-ordinary skills in medicine, were walking through a forest. They found a dead lion on the way and decided to test their skills on it. Three of them healed different parts of the lion's body and the last one gave life to the lion. The lion jumps back to life and kills them all.
- keiferski 6y agoYou're grasping at an interesting point, one that (paraphrased) is similar to fundamental teachings in Zen Buddhism. But you've gone about it in an unnecessarily hostile way, hence the downvotes.
- zkmon 6y agoyes, I didn't want to sweeten or soften the message just for the sake of avoiding the down votes. I didn't see any excessive hostility than what needed for conveying my message.
- shrimp_emoji 6y agoMaybe humans are some of the only animals smart enough to put other things above survival. Is spending eternity in the cramped room of Paleolithic life satisfying? (And by "eternity" I guess I mean the remaining lifetime of the Sun or biosphere[0].) To me, it's not. I'd rather sacrifice my basic survival and that of the whole species for something greater. (Especially since "survival" is a zero-sum, doomed goal in the long-run anyway.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dbbwrfp9toE&feature=youtu.be&t=45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dbbwrfp9toE&feature=youtu.be... unironically. xD 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future#Future_of_the_Earth,_the_Solar_System_and_the_universe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future#Fut...
- zkmon 6y agoSatisfaction and happiness were wrong goals! Producing mutations that can fit better was the only goal. After pursuing the wrong goals, you can't prove whether today's life is more satisfying or happier than paleolithic life. By evolution standards, the humans are weaker now (due to dependencies on many things) than ever.
- varjag 6y agoEvolution has no standards.
- zkmon 6y agoyou know what I meant. Biologically, human got less capable, less fit into the ecosystem and less tolerable for changes. That's how evolution measures the progress of a species.
- varjag 6y agoWhat I mean is you are attributing virtue to an emergent process. Evolution doesn't care, and survival in primordial forest is not any more "important" metric than existence elsewhere, elsehow. Either way the human species are perhaps the most successful in fitness and survival of all thus far.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]