What drives science? War, mainly. In times of peace nobody studies science cause they want to do media studies and get on TV. "Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock." So China got science during years of internal warfare. Then it's united, much more powerful than it's neighbours, develops a beauracracy and settles down to a relatively peaceful stagnation. Then someone with better science/power came along and they declined. The Greeks - science - power - relative peace - stagnation - decline The Romans - science - power -relative peace - stagnation - decline The European nations - science - power -relative peace - Uh-oh!
"Science is interesting and if you don't agree, you can fuck off -Richard Dawkins" On this point, Dawkins and I are in agreement.
No, it's not war, it's money and power. In some situations, that might equate to war and conflict, but not always. But money and power is what drives it all. Baron Max
ok so Dawkins, the editor of New Scientist and I are in agreement. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! edit: oh-oh Dawkins did agree with the editor, right?
The principal goal of science is to discover new ways to kill other people. The second goal is to find new ways to maim or disable them. The third goal is to promote long-term pharmaceutical addiction to maximise investor returns. The fourth goal is no less dreary.
Are you sure? After reading the God Delusion, I was sure Dawkins must have acquired that capacity. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Btw, do you have the context in which he quoted it?
Of course war stimulates interest in science because the technology derived from science can deliver a strategic advantage. For a stimulus for war, though, you cannot beat religion.
Name a science that has this as its principle goal. Technology goes some way toward this, but science qua science, does not.
WWI and WWII were political and ideological in nature, but I would argue that much of the worldwide arms trade is fueled by religious and sectarian conflict.
