Questions...

[swansont]

Using that argument I could get away with any waste I like.

The man next door throws away a ton of food each year so why shouldn't I throw half a ton.

Straw man argument. It's not that spending less money makes it OK, it's that money spent on science is not wasted. I asked what constitutes a large amount of money (and you still haven't answered that) and gave a comparison of money we spend on a trivial thing. The implication, which you apparently missed, is why you focus on the ethics of science spending money — which produces benefits to society — but not on the ethics of spending even more money on other activities that yield no such benefits. (Unless, of course, the point is simply having an anti-science agenda, and feeling free to manufacture anti-science argument.)

 

The other great cry of the scientist is you don't know where it will lead , a sort of open- ended appitite for money.

Well tell me where did the internal combustion engine lead-- total pollution.

And now the scientist who contributed to the world crisis present themselves as gardian angels. We might get more deadly weapons than ever before known. Meamwhile back at a ranch called earth 30,000 starve to death each day.

 

Riiight. The ICE only led to misery, with no benefit whatsoever. How many would starve if we didn't have tractors powered by internal combustion engines to grow food, and trucks to deliver it to where people live? Tell me, have you even owned a car with an ICE?

 

 

(I'll take a pass on the irony of using all the science that went into being able to post your objection, in order to object to your ability to post it, under the guise that this ability is a bad thing. What are the ethics of that?)

[magnocrat]

We cannot turn back the clock the industrial revolution has happened, technology races on regardless. Now look at the world do you see sweetness and light ? problems dissolving away? a glowing future for all mankind?

peace and prosperity abounding? What is the problem ---- its us and the way we run the world. How is it that basic hygene is missing in Africa while complex heart surgery is widespread in the rich western nations.What sodt of creatures are we when we cocern ourselves with what went on forteen billion years ago and ignore todays needs.

I'm a very fortunate man I was born into a rich nation and I have gained tremendous benefit from that chance.Safa Motesharrei has produced a mathmatical model of the break down of civilisation its happened before and could happen again.

[swansont]

We cannot turn back the clock the industrial revolution has happened, technology races on regardless. Now look at the world do you see sweetness and light ? problems dissolving away? a glowing future for all mankind?

peace and prosperity abounding?

Straw man much? Where was any of that claimed?

 

What is the problem ---- its us and the way we run the world.

And here I thought you were blaming science and technology.

 

How is it that basic hygene is missing in Africa while complex heart surgery is widespread in the rich western nations.What sodt of creatures are we when we cocern ourselves with what went on forteen billion years ago and ignore todays needs.

Did it ever occur to you that investigating one can help address the other?

[magnocrat]

Science must take its share of the blame but like politics it is run by people and ultimately we must get off those rose-tinted glasses and look around. The great problem with science is its apparent success has blinded us to its failings. I'm not anti anything lets use what we have to improve the world instead of going off on wild- goose chases.The famous atheist Sam Harris was concerned about morals and he wrote 'The Moral Landscape' In this book he suggests that we use well-being as a moral yardstick. Sounds good to me.