Science is like the WTBTS...(always coming out with New Light) (page 4)

Awakened07

LOL... 'Nazi'... Any 'good' debate has to mention it at least once, eh?

The problem is that science is practiced by humans, and in human institutions.

-As opposed to...?

freetosee

Science (from the Latin scientia, 'knowledge'), in the broadest sense, refers to any systematic knowledge or practice. In a more restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.
Research is a very tiring activity based on intellectual investigation and is aimed at discovering, interpreting, and revising human knowledge on different aspects of the world. Research can use the scientific method, but need not do so.
Scientific research relies on the application of the scientific method, a harnessing of curiosity. This research provides scientific information and theories for the explanation of the nature and the properties of humans. It makes practical applications possible. Scientific research is funded by public authorities, by charitable organisations and by private groups, including many companies. Scientific research can be subdivided into different classifications.
Historical research is embodied in the historical method.

Above taken from Wikipedia.

The WT New Light flashes whenever their false predictions run out of time and are about to be exposed. Time is the WT doomsday-cult's greatest enemy!

Scientific New Light flashes when new facts are found. Its new light undergoes much criticism and scrutiny, unlike the wt light. This scientific light truly gets brighter and brighter. Time is its best friend!

fts

BurnTheShips

Science can lead us astray just like religion can.

I think it was Isaac Asimov that once wrote a short piece on science using the term "the religion of science".

THE SCIENTISTS

If we can say "the religion of science", then the scientists are in a sense the new priesthood.

Burn

EDIT Heh, I was looking for the essay, which started with the lightning rod and Benjamin Franklin, and ended up finding this awesome passage from his book Foundation.

"In the name of the Galactic Spirit and of his prophet, Hari Seldon, and of his interpreters, the holy men of the Foundation, I curse this ship. Let the televisors of this ship, which are its eyes, become blind. Let its grapples, which are its arms, be paralyzed. Let the nuclear blasts, which are its fists, lose their function. Let the motors, which are its heart, cease to beat. Let the communications, which are its voice, become dumb. Let its ventilations, which are its breath, fade. Let its lights, which are its soul, shrivel into nothing. In the name of the Galactic Spirit, I so curse this ship."
And with his last word, at the stroke of midnight, a hand, light-years distant in the Argolid Temple, opened an ultrawave relay, which at the instantaneous speed of the ultrawave, opened another on the flagship Wienis.
And the ship died!
For it is the chief characteristic of the religion of science that it works, and that such curses as that of Aporat's are really deadly.

quietlyleaving

bts

If we can say "the religion of science", then the scientists are in a sense the new priesthood.

I think you nailed it - or we could say science is a god - a god we need to keep an eye on and keep in control.

BurnTheShips

Interesting references, BTS, but in both cases, it was the Bush administration, with its political agenda, that was trying to keep government scientists from reporting what the evidence was pointing to - worldwide global climate changes caused, at least in part, by some human activities. This was not the scientific orthodoxy trying to squelch "new light" about global climate change from fellow scientists, which was the original contention of this thread by journey on.

Thanks for the link to Rep. Peter Welch from Vermont. I know him, and know about these incidents.

All true, but Bush was leaning hard through which kinds of institutions?

BurnTheShips

-As opposed to...?

My point is that both are fallible and corruptible and we to be on guard and not to automatically accept what is shouted from the pulpits with wide eyed credulity.

Burn

Seeker4

Again, journey on, it is the nature of science itself to weed out these lying researchers, In fact, the only way you know about them is that they have been exposed by other scientists!

The only way you could point to examples of "scientific cheaters" is if other scientists used science to prove they were cheating! Your own examples are contradicting your original hypothesis and comparison of science and WTS "new light."

I agree with freetosee's last few sentences. New scientific thought is the opposite of WTS new light.

S4

Awakened07

My point is that both are fallible and corruptible and we to be on guard and not to automatically accept what is shouted from the pulpits with wide eyed credulity.
Burn

We should of course have a healthy skepticism about science, as scientists themselves have (otherwise no scientist would have changed any already 'established doctrines'. Think of the 'awe' that must have surrounded the name Sir Isaac Newton, and yet still Albert Einstein was 'heretic' enough to challenge his ideas and build upon them based on new findings).

Science can at least be partially verified by anyone who wishes to do so by gaining some knowledge, like in astrology. So there's no need to 'accept everything with wide eyed credulity'. With religious revelation however, you have to blindly trust the understanding of the person with the new religious understanding. One can check the Bible of course (if it's a Bible-based faith), but the Bible can be understood in a multitude of ways (and if you say 'No' to that, I wonder where all Bible-based religions and denominations come from?).

quietlyleaving

seekers

The only way you could point to examples of "scientific cheaters" is if other scientists used science to prove they were cheating! Your own examples are contradicting your original hypothesis and comparison of science and WTS "new light."

I don't understand what you are saying here. Do you mind explaining pls.

The Oracle

Insightful and balanced replies by...

Gopher, sir82, LtCdm.Lore, Awakened07, VM44, Drew Sagan, Leolaia, TD, DT, OTWO, Seeker4, and freetolose. Thank you.

The differences between new light from science and new light from the WT have already been eloquently explained.

The comparison is inheritantly flawed.

However, it was a worthwhile exercise to have this topic brought up so that it could be clearly debated, since on the surface, they do seem more similar than they actually are.

Peace to all, and here is to freedom to express our opinions - even if we disagree! (BTS and Journey-On)... Cheers!

The Oracle

Science is like the WTBTS...(always coming out with New Light)

Share this