Mid-semester Presentation: Current Ideas

As you all know, we've been discussing a lot on "Scientists Playing God" as the topic of our mid-semester group presentation. Just thought I'd post some of the ideas that were floating around today, in case anyone missed it...

Scientists by nature are taking on certain roles that were historically/traditionally attributed to God. As science advances, scientists use their knowledge to affect changes that would otherwise have not taken place.

Historical examples:

1. Ability to control events/situations: Meteorologists are able to predict well in advance the arrival of a hurricane, snowstorm, etc and thereby save hundreds of lives which would otherwise have been lost to, one could argue, the 'wrath of God'.

2. The atom bomb was designed for one purpose: to kill by the millions. This prerogative that the scientist takes, the choice of killing at least hundreds of thousands by the push of a button, has elevated him/her to a God-like pedestal. This is very different from mass genocide/murder: the scientist never actually designs these devices with the sole evil intent of killing people - to the scientist, it's a higher ideal.

3. Cloning. Just as there is power to take life, there is a power to create life too. Though highly controversial and pretty much unlawful to date, it's possible to clone a human and create life without the traditional method of combining the male & female gametes or whatever.

4. Stem-cell research: we are almost reaching an age where the span of one's life is becoming a pure choice, rather than an act of God. Failing organs can be harvested and transplanted, impairments easily remedied through artificial limbs/grafting etc. and even cryogenics can theoretically let you live forever.

We can clearly see that as scientists expand the realm of the possible, they are taking over aspects of God. Some of this may be reflected in what Aaron termed "the God-complex".

Examples from Popular Fiction/Movies, etc:

The Island (2004 film starring Ewan McGregor), Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Sunshine (2007 Danny Boyle film), Jurassic Park, Gattica, Moon, etc.

So, by friday we should have a functional visual as well as a clear idea of what we'll cover. Feel free to add/say anything you like on this thread.

Are science and power related to dominant empires?

Q: What trends can be established between advances in science/technology and large, powerful empires (ie superpowers) throughout human history? Try to be specific and if possible give some historical examples.

A: Any dominant empire throughout history must possess three general “types of power” classified as: economic, militaristic and political. All three definitions of power are in-part defined by the never-ending quest for an explanation of everything that occurs in the universe through rigorous and systematic methods (science) and it being a driving force for the advancement of technology. A classic example is the rivalry between the USSR and the US during the latter half of the twentieth century often referred to as the “cold war,” where the advancement of technology in warfare determined who could exert greater powers in a region of interest.

Science, Power, and Society

So, I am currently reading this interesting book. Its called Under The Dome by Stephen King. Its about a small town in Maine called Chester's Mill that is suddenly encapsulated by this dome thing, no one can come in and no one can come out, but the barrier is completely invisible. They are completely seperated from the rest of the world, besides use of cell phones and internet. Also, sound passes through the dome as well. But anyway, what I find interesting is the different elements of power in this novel. You have a guy who is extremely power thirsty named Jim Rennie who isn't exactly book smart he's really just a car salesman whose really good at blackmailing people and scaring them into doing what he wants, there is another guy named Dale Barbara who is good at buying his time and calculating his next move in order to undermine Jim Rennies power, and finally there are these strange creatures that put the Dome there in the first place with their super advance technology and sit around and laugh at all of the inhabitants while riots and murder become the norm in a once small town. So it begs the question, who really holds the power in this situation? The people with the science, the man who takes advantage of people and situations, or the man who can use his logic and reasoning to calculate the best way to gain power for himself. How is power defined by society? Does science necessarily equal power? Why is the term knowledge equals power so widely accepted? Do you think this statement is accurate? How does the objectivity/subjectivity of science tie into this issue? What does the value placed on knowledge say about our society? And finally, What other books have ya'll read that highlights different veiws on this issue? These were just somethings I was wondering about while I was reading this book. It was just an example so feel free to use your own. I wanted to get ya'lls opinions. One book that I can think of that has a pretty similar concept as The Lost World & Under the Dome is Fahrenheit 451. Ok....I have finished writing my novel of a blog now...sooo...comments? Ideas?

Discussion Blog #2

Hello everyone. As we talked about the subjectivity of science in class last week, together with the article "We Are All Scientists" by T. H. Huxley, I want to discuss the science education in college today. Does science education today satisfy what the mass population's need? Is there any subjectivity we can find in science class? What do you think the science class should be?