US Attacks 'contributed to mistrust of science'

Telegraph.co.uk ^ | 9/15/02 | David Derbyshire and Roger Highfield

[Nateman]

This guy never proves his point! What does the 911 attacks have to do with any mistrust of science? That's the reason I wanted to read this article and it did not deliver. It did however irritate me in other ways. People have lost faith in reason? Excuse me, but faith is a belief in something without or in spite of evidence otherwise, it certainly has nothing to do with the realm of reason, which demands PROOF. A better word would be confidence. Before you start moaning about morals and reason you had better learn what is and what is not reasonable first!

[Nateman]

A second, and unfixable problem, is that science is now advancing so rapidly that what seemed to be settled truth yesterday is discovered wrong tomorrow.
 
 Most of science nowadays is just about increasing the degree of accuracy of the predictions. Newton's laws of gravity are just as good now as they were when he proposed them, we just have other theories now that are more accurate. Newton's theories didn't suddenly become "wrong" they were just replaced with something better.
 
  The real problem comes when science encounters the political realm. When the truth for its own sake no longer matters , but instead a vested outcome is called for you get half truths and outright lies. And politics is all about the pursuit of agendas , hidden and open, so lies and half truths are the norm!

   Economics takes the biggest hit. With so many politicians interested in getting people to believe there is such a thing as a free lunch, there will be no shortage of crackpot professors that will support them ,  (as long as some of the loot goes their way.)

[Arkinsaw]

There can be extremes on both sides. Refusal to believe penicillin on one hand and ears on glowing mice on the other. Neither side seems to be constrained by any ethical concepts.

[m1911]

His comments reflect concerns of the scientific establishment that the public has lost faith in science. People are less deferential, and less willing to accept the views of "experts" without question, he believes.

Two points:
One - The high priests are upset that we simple folk aren't jumping everytime they cry "Ice Age, no, Global Warming".
Two - I love that experts is quoted in the article, as if to prove the point.

[Knitebane]

Sounds like someone is going the long way around to try to prove a point.

Too bad that none of his "facts" lend any evidence to it. But we can't let that get in the way of an agenda.

Science is a quest for knowledge. Technology is the application of science to extend the reach of human capability.

Neither one is inherently evil or dangerous. Nor is either one inherently good or peaceful. Rather any science or technology merely reflects, and often amplifies, the underlying good or evil of the person using it.

But since tools like science and technology can extend the power and strength of any person that uses them, these tools are a serious threat to the elitists that wish to rule. The common man with a gun is much more dangerous to the ruling elite than a man with a rock. And a common man with access to the information off of the Internet is better informed about what his rulers are doing. We can't have that.

This is just another elitist wanting to stop the spread of truth and keep the common man in his place.

[js1138]

how the dream of reason can indeed bring forth monsters

Well England did give us "The Sleep of Reason".

[Doctor Stochastic]

The Islamists are not the only Religionists who are against science. The Islamists, Creationists, Scientologists, Post-Modern-Deconstructionists, all dislike science for being science; they all believe that they have access to special knowledge that is superior to that obtained by scientific inquiry. Unfortunately, the general public hasn't seemed to increase its scientific knowledge since Roger Bacon's time.

People make decisions on global warming, spotted owls, snail darters, forest management, second hand smoke, etc., by political arguments rather than scientific ones. The lack of scientific knowledge among the public means that politics becomes the only method of determining policy rather than the method of chooseing between policies.

[wretchard]

I really enjoyed your thoughtful reply. The danger, as you seem to put it, lies in either:

1. The misuse of science by demagogues or idiots; or
2. The runaway nature of this powerful engine, which defies control.

Against this one must set the observation that reality always wins; and that insofar as science arises from an external fundamental, it can never be suppressed; howsoever people try and whatever the consequences. If, as some environtmentalists wish, one could push a button and end mankind and all his works, could that end the dream of science? If Islam could erase even the memory of knowledge, could it return mankind to the 7th century and establish the House of Islam on unquenchable ignorance?

They would be as likely to hold back the waves of the sea as keep a universe from producing sentience yet again, either here or somewhere else. It is natural to fear science; and God too, if you want to put it in those terms, as anyone must fear what can never be controlled nor fully understood. So we must go onward with science, and God too, if you will, in the face of mysteries, with hope and faith our only consolation.

"In the deserts of the heart
Let the healing fountains start,
In the prison of his days,
Teach the free man how to praise."

[Nick Danger]

I agree that we will press on regardless, hoping and praying the whole way that we don't kill ourselves doing it. Perhaps we won't.

That we will turn into cyborgs, however, is something I don't see how we get out of; the advantages for those who adopt the coming silicon "enhancements" will be so great that others will either feel compelled to follow suit or fall by the wayside.

I am curious about your term "unquenchable ignorance." The existence of this may be a new discovery on your part. We've all seen it, but I don't think anyone has named it yet. You may be the first.