Why do we need science?

Midnight FM

Gold Member
Joined
May 4, 2025
Messages
797
Reaction score
351
Points
143
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science,

Science is not a thing, it is an approach. It is an approach which relies on repeatable, testable observation not superstition, to explain the world around them.

That is why ancient humans are ancient--- without science, we could not have the world we live in today.
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
The story in the Garden of Eden is about man taking the forbidden fruit from a tree called "Knowledge".

Essentially, it is a parable about how taking knowledge apart from wisdom brings death.

1746411773336.webp


So, the knowledge is not "bad" unless it is used without wisdom.

But wisdom is not valued by mankind in the least.

Currently, mankind is constructing AI to be the source of all knowledge. Essentially, man is trying to create his own god to follow that has no wisdom.

Yea, this should go well.

:auiqs.jpg:
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
You think the world would be better off without antibiotics, just as ONE example?

The Black Plague, which peaked in Europe between 1347 and 1351, killed an estimated:
  • 75 to 200 million people worldwide
  • About 30% to 60% of Europe’s population at the time
It’s considered one of the deadliest pandemics in human history.

The Black Plague is caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis, which can infect humans in three forms:
  1. Bubonic plague – causes swollen lymph nodes (“buboes”)
  2. Septicemic plague – spreads through the bloodstream
  3. Pneumonic plague – infects the lungs, can be airborne and is the most contagious
It was mainly spread by:
  • Fleas carried by rats (especially black rats)
  • Later, human-to-human transmission (in the pneumonic form)
Today, plague is treatable with antibiotics, especially when caught early.
  • Effective antibiotics include:
    • Streptomycin
    • Gentamicin
    • Doxycycline
    • Ciprofloxacin
Without treatment, certain forms (like pneumonic plague) can be fatal within 24–72 hours.


🔬 Why does this matter in response to “Why do we need science?”​

Because without science, we wouldn’t know:
  • What causes the disease
  • How it spreads
  • How to stop it
  • How to treat it
Science turned the Black Death from a civilization-level killer into something curable with a prescription.

Citation: AI
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
Science exists whether or not we know anything about it or understand any of it, Humankind does not invent or create science They learn it and how to use it to invent or create or control things. Humankind has been doing that for its entire history whether or not they knew what science was.
 
Science exists whether or not we know anything about it or understand any of it, Humankind does not invent or create science

Well put. At its most basic level, science is observation and correlation, an elevation of the rational mind to realize that the world around us is not some magical place, but can be understood through reason, anticipated, and ultimately tamed for our own good.
 
Well put. At its most basic level, science is observation and correlation, an elevation of the rational mind to realize that the world around us is not some magical place, but can be understood through reason, anticipated, and ultimately tamed for our own good.
Might gently question the 'tamed' part. I don't think humankind has power to change science. We can change our immediate environment to some extent for better or worse. We can utilize science to our advantage for better or worse. But science remains unchanged however well or poorly we understand it.

But yes, I would guess pretty much all human who have ever existed have utilized science in some way with most having no clue that is what they were doing. :)

I also believe we human know only a tiny fraction of all, the science there is to know. And for those with deep curiosity--all true scientists have that--it is an exciting time to be a scientist.
 
Might gently question the 'tamed' part.
Tamed means turning nature to our advantage, like building highways, damning waterfalls to be power plants, creating new fertilizers and agri methods to produce more and better food stuffs, that sort of thing.

I also believe we human know only a tiny fraction of all, the science there is to know.
Of course, otherwise there would be no new technology nor innovation in the future.
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
We have science to keep people like you from being in charge
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough?

False. Self medication is the oldest science on earth.

So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them?

Science does not equate with technology.

Science is a method for exploring your universe.

If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.

No one is better off without science.

Except maybe politicians in some cases...
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
You're joking, right?
The average lifespan of hunter-gatherers and up through the dark ages who had minimal to zero science, was about 35 to 40 years. The most common non-combat killers were injuries, disease, parasites, and poor nutrition. Many died in childbirth. A simple scratch could easily get infected and eventually kill the person via gangrene.
Superstition ran supreme and innocent people were frequently murdered after being falsely accused of crimes. People declared witches were murdered. Travel was arduous and dangerous. Got a dying tooth? C
Cope with the awful pain until it finally does die and fall out.
People have this fanciful belief that life in the distant past could be a "bit" difficult, but overall, satisfying. In reality: It was extremely dangerous, and your life was likely to be quite short.
 
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science
And so they made up this concept of "god" to answer questions they couldnt.
We need science.
 
"Science is more than just a body of knowledge, science provides a means to evaluate and create new knowledge without bias. Scientists use objective evidence over subjective evidence, to reach sound and logical conclusions."

Further ... and especially on these boards ...

"Another way scientists avoid bias is by using quantitative over qualitative measurements whenever possible. A quantitative measurement is expressed with a specific numerical value. Qualitative observations are general or relative descriptions. For example, describing a rock as red or heavy is a qualitative observation. Determining a rock’s color by measuring wavelengths of reflected light or its density by measuring the proportions of minerals it contains is quantitative. Numerical values are more precise than general descriptions, and they can be analyzed using statistical calculations. This is why quantitative measurements are much more useful to scientists than qualitative observations."

-- Johnson et al; Introduction to Geology; Salt Lake Community College Press; 2017 (© = public domain) ...
 
15th post
Science exists whether or not we know anything about it or understand any of it, Humankind does not invent or create science ...


Herkunft und Geschichte von​


science​

Um 1350 herum bezeichnete das Wort „Wissenschaft“ den „Zustand oder die Tatsache des Wissens“ sowie das „Wissen, das durch Studium erworben wurde“, also „Kenntnisse“ oder „Informationen“. Auch die Bedeutung „Gewissheit des Wissens, Sicherheit“ war gebräuchlich. Es stammt aus dem Altfranzösischen science, was so viel wie „Wissen, Lernen, Anwendung“ oder „Gesamtheit des menschlichen Wissens“ (12. Jahrhundert) bedeutete. Dieses Wort wiederum hat seinen Ursprung im Lateinischen scientia, was „Wissen, Erkenntnis, Sachverstand“ bedeutet. Es leitet sich von sciens (Genitiv scientis) ab, was „wissend, fähig“ bedeutet, und ist das Partizip Präsens von scire, was „wissen“ heißt.

Die ursprüngliche Bedeutung des lateinischen Verbs könnte „etwas von etwas anderem trennen, unterscheiden“ oder auch „einschneiden“ gewesen sein. Dies steht in Verbindung mit scindere, was „schneiden, teilen“ bedeutet (aus der indogermanischen Wurzel *skei-, die „schneiden, spalten“ bedeutet; sie ist auch die Quelle des Griechischen skhizein „spalten, zerreißen, teilen“, des Gotischen skaidan und des Altenglischen sceadan „teilen, trennen“).

Das Oxford English Dictionary (OED) vermerkt, dass die älteste englische Bedeutung des Begriffs heute auf Theologie und Philosophie beschränkt ist. Ab dem späten 14. Jahrhundert wurde „Wissenschaft“ im Englischen auch als „Buchwissen“ verstanden, ebenso als „bestimmter Wissenszweig oder systematisiertes Wissen über eine bestimmte Gruppe von Objekten“. Zudem bedeutete es „Fähigkeit, Klugheit“ und „List“. Um 1400 herum wurde es auch für „erfahrungsbasiertes Wissen“ verwendet, ebenso für „eine Fertigkeit, die durch Ausbildung oder Handwerk erworben wurde“, also ein „Handwerk“ oder einen „Beruf“.

Ab dem späten 14. Jahrhundert entwickelte sich der spezifischere Sinn von „kollektiver menschlicher Erkenntnis“, insbesondere jener, die durch systematische Beobachtung, Experimente und logisches Denken gewonnen wird. Die moderne, eingeschränkte Bedeutung als „Körper von regelmäßigen oder methodischen Beobachtungen oder Aussagen zu einem bestimmten Thema oder einer Spekulation“ ist seit 1725 belegt. Im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert wurde dies häufig als philosophy bezeichnet.

Die Unterscheidung zwischen „Naturwissenschaften“ und „Geisteswissenschaften“ ist seit den 1670er Jahren belegt. Man versteht sie oft als Trennung zwischen theoretischer Wahrheit (Griechisch epistemē) und Methoden zur Erzielung praktischer Ergebnisse (tekhnē). Allerdings wird science manchmal auch für praktische Anwendungen verwendet, während art die Anwendung von Geschicklichkeit bezeichnet.

Die vorherrschende moderne Verwendung, die „Natur- und Physikwissenschaften“ beschreibt, ist im Allgemeinen auf das Studium der Phänomene des materiellen Universums und seiner Gesetze beschränkt und setzte sich Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts durch.

----- Translation via DEEPL ->

Around 1350, the word “science” referred to the “state or fact of knowing” as well as “knowledge acquired through study”, i.e. ‘knowledge’ or “information”. The meaning “certainty of knowledge, certainty” was also common. It comes from the Old French science, which meant “knowledge, learning, application” or “totality of human knowledge” (12th century). This word in turn has its origins in the Latin scientia, which means “knowledge, insight, expertise”. It is derived from sciens (genitive scientis), which means “knowing, capable”, and is the present participle of scire, which means “to know”.

The original meaning of the Latin verb could have been “to separate or distinguish something from something else” or “to cut”. This is related to scindere, meaning “to cut, divide” (from the Indo-European root *skei-, meaning “to cut, split”; it is also the source of the Greek skhizein “to split, tear, divide”, the Gothic skaidan and the Old English sceadan “to divide, separate”).

The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) notes that the oldest English meaning of the term today is limited to theology and philosophy. From the late 14th century, “science” was also understood in English as “book knowledge”, as well as a “particular branch of knowledge or systematized knowledge about a particular group of objects”. It also meant “ability, wisdom” and “cunning”. Around 1400, it was also used for “experience-based knowledge”, as well as for “a skill acquired through training or craft”, i.e. a ‘trade’ or “profession”.

From the late 14th century onwards, the more specific sense of “collective human knowledge” developed, especially that gained through systematic observation, experimentation and logical reasoning. The modern, restricted meaning as a “body of regular or methodical observations or statements on a particular subject or speculation” has been documented since 1725. In the 17th and 18th centuries, this was often referred to as philosophy.

The distinction between “natural sciences” and “humanities” has been documented since the 1670s. It is often understood as a separation between theoretical truth (Greek epistemē) and methods for achieving practical results (tekhnē). However, science is sometimes also used for practical applications, while art refers to the application of skill.

The predominant modern usage describing “natural and physical sciences” is generally limited to the study of the phenomena of the material universe and its laws, and came into use in the mid-19th century.
-----
source: Etymologie und Herkunft von „science“ - etymonline
-----
 
The story in the Garden of Eden is about man taking the forbidden fruit from a tree called "Knowledge". ...

To eat the fruit of the tree of the "knowledge what's good and evil" catapulted us out of the paradise. The main problem which I see in this context: Now we are not able to live without real justice - but real justice is a rare good here in this world.
 
Last edited:
Ancient humans lived for thousands of years without any conception of modern science, and seemed to get along well-enough? So why do modern humans need science, especially considering how miserable some of them are in spite of many technologies being made available to them? If they'd be happier without it, then they'd be better off without it.
Without science you couldn't post on the internet asking why we need science. Also some wandering cheetah or bear would have already eaten you.
 
Back
Top Bottom