I belive science has done more good than harm.....science is not to blame it is the way man misuses the discoveries?
I belive science has done more good than harm.....science is not to blame it is the way man misuses the discoveries! I am doing a debate on science has done more harm than good and I an the opposition......i need some rebuts that I could refute to the opposition and win the debate....may you please help me? Asked by Sash500 27 months ago Similar questions: belive science harm blame man misuses discoveries Society > Religion & Spirituality.
Similar questions: belive science harm blame man misuses discoveries.
The early "scientists" were Christians. Rather, "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20). The problem isn't technological knowledge but stuff that people CALL "science" falsely, from evidenceless "evolution" (the actual evidence is a devolution) to using "science" in religions (it's not what you know, it's WHO you know.
) The real problem with science is that human beings are the one using it, and human beings typically are selfish in their choices, even preferring the suffering of others to a small, personal loss. But historically, one has many cases of positive uses of technology: I would start with nuclear bombs. While folks complain about those whining folks willfully ignore the fact that Japan was a very racist, very violent culture (Rape of Nanking, anyone?
"Comfort women"? ) that started a war with the United States because they hoped we'd "appease" them by letting them continue raping and robbing the eastern Pacific Rim nations (China, Indonesia, etc.) The U.S. Was stopping Japan from getting oil to further its plans to rape and pillage, started a war, and we ended that war with two nuclear bombs. How many died in those two bombings?
Half as many as would have died if we'd invaded the islands as planned. Yes, those two bombs saved at least 100,000 Japanese lives, besides 200,000 or so American lives. Why did the Beatles sell so many records?
I don't know either, but the result was that EMI (their publishing company) had a lot of money, which money they then used to invent and develop the Magnetic Resonance Imaging technology. How many lives have been saved by the better cancer diagnosis of MRI's? And that's all bonus, as MRI's are being used instead of X-Rays (which might cause more cancer.
) Thus we see that it isn't the thing, it's who is using the thing that is the problem..
OK, try this. Be careful not to sound condescending; that will kill you in the classroom just like it does in the court room. Admit that science has caused many problems, over the years, for many good people.To wit: 1.
It destroyed the wonderful idea that the planet is...flat. Heck (cleaned up for classroom presentation), anybody in Arizona can see thet the world is flat! 2.It totally messed up the 1000 year-old belief thet tha world is only 6700 years old.
“Plate Tectonics” my sit down. We use K Mart plates in our house!3. How about the hateful lie that the world is not the center of the Universe.
Coupled wif this is tha lie thet the sun don't spin around the earth. You kin thank old Copernicus, Galileo and thet pesky Dutchman whot invented the telescope, fur thet one. Science is reel bad!
How about that heathin Democritus, he done went n defied the well loved idee that all thangs is made up from fire, water, dirt n wind. Thet good information served good people until thet old heathin Democritus done went n said..that's all ballyhoo, thangs is made from tiny little thangs we kain't see called...atromos! This here - sacrilege was said around 350 BCE.
Evabody knows the correkt answer is dirt wind, water n fire!Science....baaaaaad! How about the scientific lie thet the world is a sittin in space wif nothin ta hold it up? Evabody knowa the earth is a sittin on the back of a large tortoise.
When some smart feller calls you on thet one jest wait until he is finished wif all the scientificmunbo jumbo 'n lies 'n delivers the koo de grass, "Pray tell, upon what is the tortoise resting? " and slam em wif,.."it's tortoises all the way down"! In debate we call it..."point by contrast"!
The smart ones will get it and the rest don't matter. Something like that. Sources: rednecksputter, Phill-oss-a-fur, read some, been places .
1 First of all, you need, in any debate, to define your terms. "Science" simply means "knowledge. " In what way has knowledge done more harm than good?
Is the debate actually about technology? If so, then forget hospitals, most medications, insulated homes, air conditioning, central heating, freezers, microwave ovens, washing machines, electric lights, etc. -- if 'science' has done more harm than good. If you carefully define your terms, you will win this debate hands down.
Always, ALWAYS define your terms carefully in a debate.
First of all, you need, in any debate, to define your terms. "Science" simply means "knowledge. " In what way has knowledge done more harm than good?
Is the debate actually about technology? If so, then forget hospitals, most medications, insulated homes, air conditioning, central heating, freezers, microwave ovens, washing machines, electric lights, etc. -- if 'science' has done more harm than good. If you carefully define your terms, you will win this debate hands down.
Always, ALWAYS define your terms carefully in a debate.
2 In terms of saving lives, I would cite public health measures which, in the developed world, have eliminated most of the infectious diseases that have ravaged mankind. Show a plot of the average life expectancy vs. time. These advances were the result of the understanding of disease as spread by microorganisms and the consequent development of vaccines, clean water supplies, control of disease vectors, antibiotics, etc.Second on my list would be the "Green Revolution," which used genetics and agricultural science to achieve dramatic improvements in agricultural productivity, and thus improve conditions for the starving millions in the world.
In terms of saving lives, I would cite public health measures which, in the developed world, have eliminated most of the infectious diseases that have ravaged mankind. Show a plot of the average life expectancy vs. time. These advances were the result of the understanding of disease as spread by microorganisms and the consequent development of vaccines, clean water supplies, control of disease vectors, antibiotics, etc.Second on my list would be the "Green Revolution," which used genetics and agricultural science to achieve dramatic improvements in agricultural productivity, and thus improve conditions for the starving millions in the world.
3 P.S. Science may once have meant "knowledge" but it has a different meaning now, which is both a method and a more restricted domain of knowledge.
P.S. Science may once have meant "knowledge" but it has a different meaning now, which is both a method and a more restricted domain of knowledge.
" "Religion & Spirituality" "science is doing more harm than good." "why has science done more harm than good" "science and religion....." "what are the differences between science and spirituality" "science has done more harm than good.
What are the differences between science and spirituality.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.