Will Science and Technology Destroy Human Civilisation?

Discussion in 'Comparative Religion' started by Mind Over Matter, Sep 25, 2010.

  1. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564


    The stupid is you, to come to such idiotic conclusion.
    You seams not realizing the intellectual are the brains for mass murder , wen they want to impose their will upon the masses.
    Wake up no one is mentioning that in Dachau one of every 6 death was a Polish priest , go there to Dachau get educated
    Wake up, the practicing doctor in England once got into power is killing their own people on Syria, Dictators are usually educated people , once they get into power with their rational they become murderers. Take example Fidel Castro a law student , promoting liberty for the people , once got into power , put hundreds under a firing squad . So far the only I have respect is Mobarek he steeped down
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Arioch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    @arauca --

    Yup, humans are douches, they really are. But you have to admit that there's no evidence that religion alleviates this condition.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564


    Religion base is to have compassion for life , but do we ? we are self centered, we use those teaching as long it satisfy our surroundings or our kinds . Yet I would say the emotional human might have compassion in comparison to a rational human . The rational will do a premeditated rational way to kill yet the emotional might be more merciful
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    So education leads to mass murder? Did you know some of the Nazi leadership also held leadership positions in their churches? Did you know Martin Luther wrote a book called "On the Jews and their lies"? And that he said, "We are at fault in not slaying them [the jews]" (for avenging the death of Jesus Christ). In Mein Kampf, Hitler listed Martin Luther as one of the greatest reformers.
     
  8. Arioch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    @arauca --

    That may be the base for some religions(such as jainism), but to extend that categorically to all religion is a fallacy. You simply can't do it because it's demonstrably false.

    Emotion is, in part(and the actions resulting from it are in whole), a product of human reason. The two are not mutually exclusive, nor are they opposite sides of the same coin.
     
  9. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564


    Lock there are a hell of a lot if religious people who commit murder in the name of god , and there are a hell of educated religious people that use a faith for their own benefit to be in leadership
    The point here: people in leadership are educated class , so was Martin Luther , so is the Pope, This are the people who sway the masses and they sway the masses to do good or evil in a large scale. The same thing happen in a secular society. Take notice in early times the fight was one to one . Now due science and technology 6 man dropped the fat man over Nagasaki killed around 60000 people . In a gas chamber with a capacity ( designed by engineers ) 300 people are killed with X kg ( less then 10 kg ).
    So you answer does science and tech. increases the killing rate. Remember we choose the job and we contribute our best thoughts at the job. Think back why was McArthur removed . ? was not he that wanted to make ditch by bombarding N Korea with Atomic bomb ( an other West Point graduate ?)
     
  10. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    I am not sure emotion is product of reasoning . Emotion naturally reacts to the call . while reason will evaluate first the self convenience and safety.
     
  11. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    Science alone will not kill anyone, but technology, in the hands of the religiously irrational, will kill millions. When you think there is an afterlife, you will think less of killing people. Suicide bombers do so because of the promise of an afterlife.
     
  12. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    bomb capable of killing people in their thousands while leaving buildings standing is dead at 89


    'It's the most sane and moral weapon ever devised,' claimed American
    Cohen worked on bomb dropped on Nagasaki in 1945

    Neutron bomb inventor Samuel T. Cohen, who designed the tactical nuclear weapon intended to kill people but do minimal damage to structures, has died.

    He died from complications of stomach cancer on Sunday at his home in the Brentwood area of Los Angeles.
    Sam Cohen: The impetus behind his development of the neutron bomb was a desire to limit the destructiveness of war

    Samuel Cohen who has died of cancer. Ethicists questioned a weapon designed to destroy only life but Cohen said the bomb's limited effects were a more moral alternative to other nuclear weapons

    Cohen worked for the RAND Corporation and the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory when he developed the small neutron bomb in 1958, which used tiny particles that could zip through tanks, walls or buildings with minimal damage but kill humans, usually by attacking their central nervous system.
    THE DEADLY 'FAT MAN'
    Deadly Legacy: The mushroom cloud over Nagasaki

    The bomb dropped on Nagasaki was only the third such weapon ever detonated. After the test of the 'Trinity' device in New Mexico an atomic bomb was dropped from the B-29 nicknamed 'Enola Gay' over the Japanese city of Hiroshima with devastating results.

    When the near-obliteration of the city did not result in the expected Japanese surrender a second device - Fat Man - was dropped over Nagasaki.

    All three devices were different in design, and there was considerable anxiety among the team behind the atomic bomb project that the detonations might result in a 'fizzle' right up until the moment that each terrible mushroom cloud blossomed.

    Fat Man may have been so named after Winston Churchill, although most sources name rotund actor Sydney Greenstreet as the inspiration for the nickname.

    The total number of casualties in those two bombings will never be precisely known. No exact figures for the pre-bombing populations of the cities are available and the huge firestorms that followed each detonation destroyed many of the bodies altogether.

    Certainly in excess of 70,000 people lost their lives as a result of the near-total destruction of Nagasaki.

    These first three bombs were known as 'atomic' bombs at the time, and although they could just as accurately be called 'nuclear' bombs the term is more commonly used to describe the even more powerful hydrogen bombs developed by the rival superpowers during the Cold War

    It also minimised long-term nuclear contamination.

    Ethicists questioned a weapon designed to destroy only life but Cohen spent much of his life advocating for its adoption, saying the bomb's limited effects were a more moral alternative to other nuclear weapons.

    'It's the most sane and moral weapon ever devised,' he told the New York Times in September.

    'It's the only nuclear weapon in history that makes sense in waging war. When the war is over, the world is still intact.'

    The Reagan administration worked on developing the weapon in the 1980s, and other nations including France and Russia are believed to have possessed them.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mb-dies-peacefully-home-89.html#ixzz1nc5QVtOe


    Here us a rational scientist and there are many like him
     
  13. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    I'm not worried about the weapons so much as the people who would use them. The Japanese were held in the grip of faith. The emperor was seen as a God.
     
  14. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    Lock lets get back to the topic. We are on a tangent
    Topic :
    Will Science and Technology Destroy Human Civilisation?
     
  15. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    Not on their own they won't. But left in the hands of the religious, yes they will, certainly.
     
  16. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564



    What do you think our soldiers are holly crusaders ? I don't think we have holly war now . everything is business . The war machinery is in secular hands , but they are using so called christian boys to fight there economical war.
     
  17. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
  18. keith1 Guest

    Technical advancement requires education.
    Social advancement requires education.

    Those not destined for college need to be educated.
    And if college is a failed education system, it needs to be reformed, from the administration office down...

    Failure of the education system is the failure, and destruction, of civilization.
     
  19. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564

    I agree with you specially your last line . I am also for free spiritual thinking
    Science is science for improvement and understanding nature for mankind life. But we don't need mass destructive weapons.
     
  20. Arioch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    @arauca --

    It is. Emotions do not spring, fully formed, from nothingness the way Minerva sprang from the head of Zeus. Emotions, like all human thought, require an impetus, something to get it going. The brain, upon receiving that impetus then processes it in a way that is relatively predetermined by the brain's shape and neurochemistry, just as all human thought is. While the emotional response(for it is always a response to something) may not be "rational", it is still arrived at through human reason which is as much a part of the shape of our brains as the folds of gray matter are.

    Now, does this mean that our emotions bow to our conscious use of reason? Of course not, very often our reason doesn't bow to our conscious use. However that doesn't mean that our reasoning abilities are not at use in our brain. I think if you understood just how much logic our brain uses while interpreting data(all of this without a single conscious thought) your jaw would drop to the floor. Every single piece of data that your sense organs collect is processed through filters and filters of logic all of which are colored by the data that the brain has previously taken in(in this regard your beliefs and memories form a sort of logical premise for your brain to work with).
     
  21. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    Perhaps religion is nothing more than people sharing their emotions.

    Since compassion appears to arise in animals, who have no religion, then we can better understand that this is one of the many animal characteristics we inherited from our screeching bipedal ancestors.

    Do you remember this quip from Darwin?

    The Descent of Man (1871), Vol. 2, 404-5.
     
  22. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    I agree with the filtering or I would call it comparing or assimilating ,
    but the word logic is good for philosophy students , which make them feel
    good, that is ok with me too.
     
  23. Gravage Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,241
    To be honest, I think science has become religion, because you must not have opinion that is contradictory to what mainstream science thinks, but the fact is people who didn't think as the mainstream science thinks made the revolutionary steps in scientific discoveries.
    None has the right to have the opinion different to the mainstream scientific community.
    Scientists have lost their sense of spirituality, scientists ignore spiritual part of a human being, they only look materialistic part. Humanity does not exist anymore, only the race for selfish discoveries and to prove that scientist a is smarter than scientist b. I disagree that competition is healthy-why there are so many sick people around the world, because you need to be competitive otherwise, you lose your job, and before that you lose your health. We don't need scientific discoveries and improvement that makes us more stressful-that's what all about science is, instead of making our lives less stressful, with science in the background, the competition is extremely fierce and ruthless, and people only get more sick, while science is trying to provide more therapies and drugs and vaccines for people, instead they should make people's lives less stressful. But the main problem is science has made people's life more stressful, this is why it has not helped that much when it comes to quality of life-longer life, yes, but with much more stress. It's incredible how we intelligent species, are destroying each other with stress and competition, we have the power to nullify stress and competition and make everyone equal, instead science and politics are destroying us one way or another.
    Cheers.
     

Share This Page