• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Society based on Science

Can Society be Organized using Science

  • yes

    Votes: 10 58.8%

  • no

    Votes: 7 41.2%
  • Total voters
    17
Prof_Lunaphiles

Prof_Lunaphiles

Revolutionary
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 19, 2019
Messages
586
Reaction score
56
Location
Transient
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Do any of you, brilliant, independent critical thinkers, have any ideas on how society could be organized using science?
 
Define "society organized by science" (or religion.)
 
Simple...it can't...
 
Data, molecules, crystals, light beams etc., can be organized by using science.

Society is always changing - a product of the thoughts of its members. Impossible to organize because once you think you have succeeded, people die (or leave), new ones are born (or migrate in), and your "organized" society is now different, and must be re-organized.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Do any of you, brilliant, independent critical thinkers, have any ideas on how society could be organized using science?
Click to expand...

You should perhaps provide your own spin first Prof. It would be a treat learning how a brilliant and independent thinker approaches the poll query.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Do any of you, brilliant, independent critical thinkers, have any ideas on how society could be organized using science?
Click to expand...

You don't need just ideas. There is a concrete example. Singapore.
 
SkyChief said:
Data, molecules, crystals, light beams etc., can be organized by using science.

Society is always changing - a product of the thoughts of its members. Impossible to organize because once you think you have succeeded, people die (or leave), new ones are born (or migrate in), and your "organized" society is now different, and must be re-organized.
Click to expand...

Replace society with science and you've got the right idea...
 
How do you control nature, it lives by its own rules...so that’s a big fat No.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Do any of you, brilliant, independent critical thinkers, have any ideas on how society could be organized using science?
Click to expand...

nah let's just organize it around how we think people should act and be treated

science can help perhaps with evaluating the results of some actions

probably want to avoid religious threats and bribes that cannot be verified as sources of policy
 
blarg said:
nah let's just organize it around how we think people should act and be treated
Click to expand...
That will be deliberated in the civil rights discussion.

blarg said:
science can help perhaps with evaluating the results of some actions
Click to expand...
I believe science can provide the demarcation of knowledge and subsequently, the demarcation of law; which is useful for understanding the separation of government entities.

blarg said:
probably want to avoid religious threats and bribes that cannot be verified as sources of policy
Click to expand...
Atheism is a political doctrine
 
Rogue Valley said:
You should perhaps provide your own spin first Prof. It would be a treat learning how a brilliant and independent thinker approaches the poll query.
Click to expand...
Yes. I know science can be used to organize society. It has to do with understanding the social contract theory, and its subsequent derivatives and applications. As it has turned out, the ultimate social contract has not been deliberated properly, because of the lack of information manipulation tools that recent computer applications have delivered into service.

Emerging technology suggests that knowledge can be demarcated into six realms of reality:

Reality
  1. Nature
  2. Technology
  3. Life
  4. Society
  5. Culture
  6. Time

And derivatives of the technology suggests that the government can be divided into six parts:

Government
  1. Sovereignty
  2. Prosecution
  3. Diplomacy
  4. Commerce
  5. Trust
  6. Property
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Yes. I know science can be used to organize society. It has to do with understanding the social contract theory, and its subsequent derivatives and applications. As it has turned out, the ultimate social contract has not been deliberated properly, because of the lack of information manipulation tools that recent computer applications have delivered into service.

Emerging technology suggests that knowledge can be demarcated into six realms of reality:

Reality
  1. Nature
  2. Technology
  3. Life
  4. Society
  5. Culture
  6. Time

And derivatives of the technology suggests that the government can be divided into six parts:

Government
  1. Sovereignty
  2. Prosecution
  3. Diplomacy
  4. Commerce
  5. Trust
  6. Property
Click to expand...

So we are not supposed to be talking about real science but those silly pretendy 'social sciences; where testable evidence is non existent and which are subject to fashion and the whims of the latest trendy guru.
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
That will be deliberated in the civil rights discussion.

I believe science can provide the demarcation of knowledge and subsequently, the demarcation of law; which is useful for understanding the separation of government entities.


Atheism is a political doctrine
Click to expand...

is it i imagine most of us don't want laws based on religion but i suppose you could if you believed it was a good way to control people in ways you want
 
Prof_Lunaphiles said:
Do any of you, brilliant, independent critical thinkers, have any ideas on how society could be organized using science?
Click to expand...

The fruits of science are most certainly used in the organization of society, but otherwise, this is a nonsensical question. Science is a methodology for investigating reality, not for organizing anything.
 
Tlrmln said:
The fruits of science are most certainly used in the organization of society, but otherwise, this is a nonsensical question. Science is a methodology for investigating reality, not for organizing anything.
Click to expand...

The pursuit of science in terms of inquiry and exploration is certainly that but such things as engineering take the knowledge gained by that and apply it to solving problems.

Thus it is very obvious that using the ideas generated by scientific inquiry into social behavior is very relevant to how we then choose to structure our society.

The role of women for example; there is a pervading meam of expecting women to be the same as men in society, in that they are expected to be as focused on their careers, on political power and general advancement as men. Thus we have questions of why is it that few women are on boards of directors or are other positions of power. We have programs to create opportunities for women to advance because there is the idea that it must be due to prejudice that there is not an equal number of them in such positions.

That this has no basis in science is slowly being shown. That science shows us that there are normal natural differences between men and women in terms of their drive to get into such positions from extremely early in human development will, if allowed to, become a reason to stop pushing girls so hard into places they don't want to be in.

YouTube
 
Tim the plumber said:
The pursuit of science in terms of inquiry and exploration is certainly that but such things as engineering take the knowledge gained by that and apply it to solving problems.

Thus it is very obvious that using the ideas generated by scientific inquiry into social behavior is very relevant to how we then choose to structure our society.

The role of women for example; there is a pervading meam of expecting women to be the same as men in society, in that they are expected to be as focused on their careers, on political power and general advancement as men. Thus we have questions of why is it that few women are on boards of directors or are other positions of power. We have programs to create opportunities for women to advance because there is the idea that it must be due to prejudice that there is not an equal number of them in such positions.

That this has no basis in science is slowly being shown. That science shows us that there are normal natural differences between men and women in terms of their drive to get into such positions from extremely early in human development will, if allowed to, become a reason to stop pushing girls so hard into places they don't want to be in.

YouTube
Click to expand...

There is a legitimate reason for that...it is the way Jehovah created man and woman, with distinct, natural roles...woman was to be man's compliment, to complete him...that has not changed down through the centuries...
 
Elvira said:
There is a legitimate reason for that...it is the way Jehovah created man and woman, with distinct, natural roles...woman was to be man's compliment, to complete him...that has not changed down through the centuries...
Click to expand...

There is no legitimacy in any claim based on a book of plain evil. Do you consider slavery OK? If not then you must abandon any pretense at seeing your christian bible as good.

If we do experiments and see what the real world does. Look at the evidence. Think about it and check it again and again then we will get to a good result.
 
Tim the plumber said:
There is no legitimacy in any claim based on a book of plain evil. Do you consider slavery OK? If not then you must abandon any pretense at seeing your christian bible as good.

If we do experiments and see what the real world does. Look at the evidence. Think about it and check it again and again then we will get to a good result.
Click to expand...

Evil is the world we live in without Jehovah's guidance...
 
The agnostic physicist David Berlinski has written a trenchant critique of Dawkins in his book The Devil’s Delusion, a challenge to Dawkins’ The God Delusion. On the inside flap of the book, introducing his subject, he writes,

"Has anyone provided a proof of God’s inexistence? Not even close.

Has quantum cosmology explained the emergence of the universe and why it is here? Not even close.

Have the sciences explained why our universe seems to be fine-tuned to allow for the existence of life? Not even close.

Are physicists and biologists willing to believe anything so long as it is not religious thought? Close enough.

Has rationalism in moral thought provided us with an understanding of what is good, what is right, and what is moral? Not close enough.

Has secularism in the terrible twentieth century been a force for good? Not even close to being close.

Is there a narrow and oppressive orthodoxy of thought and opinion within the sciences? Close enough.

Does anything in the sciences or in their philosophy justify the claim that religious belief is irrational? Not even ballpark.

Is scientific atheism a frivolous exercise in intellectual contempt? Dead on."

David Berlinski is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture.
 
Elvira said:
Evil is the world we live in without Jehovah's guidance...
Click to expand...

Is owning slaves who you can beat as long as they doin't die within 3 days of the beating OK or is it evil?

Straight easy question. Try to answer it directly.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Is owning slaves who you can beat as long as they doin't die within 3 days of the beating OK or is it evil?

Straight easy question. Try to answer it directly.
Click to expand...

You act as if Jehovah invented/condoned slavery...He merely tolerated it temporarily...slavery is the invention of man...

Does the Bible Condone Slavery? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

A Religious Dilemma in Colonial Brazil — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Did God Condone the Slave Trade? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
 
RAMOSS said:
How do raw links to a biased and unscholarly web site show anything at all?
Click to expand...

Shoot the messenger, as usual, when ya got nothin' else...:roll:

Read 'em and learn or stay as you are...:2razz:
 
Elvira said:
Shoot the messenger, as usual, when ya got nothin' else...:roll:
Click to expand...

When you can't even extract the message from the raw link, and discuss it, and the passages it refers to in context, then, I see no reason not to shoot the messenger. One failing I noticed in the JW website, is when they aren't pretty much copying another source, they do not show the passages in context, nor with a good anaylsis of the original language, or the cultural content at all. Like many, they do 'theology by sound bits.' That is lazy , and most often inaccurate.
 
RAMOSS said:
When you can't even extract the message from the raw link, and discuss it, and the passages it refers to in context, then, I see no reason not to shoot the messenger. One failing I noticed in the JW website, is when they aren't pretty much copying another source, they do not show the passages in context, nor with a good anaylsis of the original language, or the cultural content at all. Like many, they do 'theology by sound bits.' That is lazy , and most often inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Backatcha...:mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom