~AUGUST'S DISCUSSION TOPIC~ SCIENCE: A THREAT TO SOCIETY?

Science has shown itself capable both of killing and curing – on balance, for which does it have more potential?

Science has always been discussed this way. Some think that science is a no good entity that threatens to rip out the souls of billions and make them either corpses or religion-less living zombies. Some people think that science is a really good entity that helps keep the souls in the body of billions and make them both live longer and more productive and bring us closer to God than ever before. But has anyone ever asked himself this question: is this discussion about science itself, or is it about us?

I decided to approach the topic this way because I feel that a lot of people think of science as if it is a person instead of a mindless and soulless entity. The way they look at science is as if we are looking at a person who is new in society and asking ourselves “Should we allow this person to live amongst us, or will he do something to us that will kill us or make us evil?”. When we look back at science, does it have such behaviour? Does it think on its own and plan out destructive plans to destroy us, or is it just an entity that is misunderstood and misused?

When I look back at the question “SCIENCE HAS SHOWN ITSELF CAPABLE OF BOTH KILLING AND CURING-ON BALANCE, FOR WHICH DOES IT HAVE MORE POTENTIAL?”, I actually see another question, a question that is more about us rather than science. The question I see is “Is there a possibility for science to be misused?” And in my opinion, when you look at it this way, you actually see that we are talking about ourselves, and from there it goes back to the morale of humans.

When you look back at history, you will see that most of the time science becomes bad stuff because of the human misuse of it. And when you look back at history again, you will see that most of the time science becomes good stuff because of correct use by humans. And from an overall perspective, you will see that it is you (or more accurately: your intention) who determines whether science is good stuff or bad stuff.

When you look at it this way, you will see that science is just a mindless and soulless entity that does not think for itself. It is more  a tool rather than a creature that can think and walk and kill on its own. So because of that, I propose that we rephrase the question:

“SCIENCE HAS SHOWN ITSELF CAPABLE OF BOTH KILLING AND CURING-ON BALANCE, FOR WHICH DOES IT HAVE MORE POTENTIAL?” to “HUMAN INTENTION HAS SHOWN ITSELF CAPABLE OF BOTH KILLING AND CURING-ON BALANCE, FOR WHICH DOES IT HAVE MORE POTENTIAL?”.

It sounds more accurate this way....haha!

Ariffin B Mohd Amir (June 08)

Is there any question whether the question makes any sense? Of course science has more potential for curing.

There are cases where science has caused some problems for us*. However, what would our lives be without science? A world with unsolved diseases, no transport** and definitely no comfort. Science does more than just cure and kill. It brings us forward; it makes our hard lives easier to cope with.

Try imagining going to work or school that has no working lights, no stationary, no elevators, and no air conditioning! Then getting home to a place where there’s none of the things previously mentioned, and you have to cook with fire with the sticks you’ve collected from some your backyard***; and once all your hard work is done there is no laptop, or television to at least let your mind have some time to rest by mindlessly watching some clips from youtube. You can’t even go out to meet friend! Thanks to the lack of heavy machinery wild animals would be free to roam through our streets and attack us when we attempt to leave our homes.

That’s what our lives would be. Hard, pointless, and most likely empty. And by then, we most likely would have killed ourselves. So with that I say science has already made the biggest cure it could have. It made us, the laziest creatures on earth have a chance at a nice comfortable life. What’s a little genocide via weapons of destruction compared to that? Shouldn’t that be the question?

*hell; it has caused enough issues that the question came up.
**Well, at least transport that won’t poop while you’re travelling.
***which would most likely be a jungle thanks to the lack of pesticide and lawnmowers. But I guess sticks are fairly easy to collect. So fire isn’t an issue I guess.

Aiman Ahmad (ex-IB 5)

The word science comes from the word ‘sciencia’ in Latin which means knowledge. Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge which uses observation and experimentation to describe and explain natural phenomena. As time goes by, mankind has advanced a lot with the help of science. However, whether we realize it or not, we can hardly keep up with the development and improvement of science, thus resulting in pollution. In other words, we are destroying our own planet. For example, the hole in the ozone layer that we created unintentionally increases the cancer rates in the world. As a result, some of us have lost our friends and family due to the inventions of man in science. Another example, the greenhouse effect has made the earth’s average temperature increase, and the rainfall pattern has changed because of it. The change in the rainfall pattern and also the melting of the ice in North Pole and South Pole result in the rise in sea level and also a wide impact on wildlife and humans. History tells us that many species have gone extinct because of our selfishness, greediness and our inventions. Ask yourselves, are we the next to go? Are we going to take along a few floras and faunas with us? Or the whole planet, perhaps…  Let us think about it…

Hakim Bin Azman (June 08)

Science a threat?

Should you ever have any doubt on the value of science and technology on your personal life all you have to do is close your eyes and imagine living in a moderately crowded city like Kuala Lumpur without electricity. In broader terms, modern society cannot function without the technological supports and the underpinning scientific knowledge. Period.

A society that is ill-informed about science is a threat to itself and others; that science, “hard” science that is, is never a threat to society is self-evident.

The ability for a country like Malaysia, relatively developed, and is a significant “consumer” of the sciences and related technologies, to further improve the quality of life of Malaysians, hinges on the depth and breadth of our scientific capital. The question is: have we the capacity to be a significant scientific contributor in the future? That is; are we in the possession of a cultural mind set and educational infrastructure, beyond numbers of buildings, numbers of teachers and students and the length and frequencies of our tests? I think not.

In our region small countries like New Zealand, current population of less than 5 millions, have 3 Nobel Laureates in the sciences. Of the 9 Australian Nobel Laureates 8 are from the sciences. Current population of Australia is about 21 millions. Care to predict when Malaysia will produce a Nobel Laureate in any one of the sciences?

Mr Masukor Sari (Mathematics)

Science can be inferred as a system of gaining knowledge. Basically science is known as a discipline of study that can be justified as the system applies experimentation and investigation to explain and elucidate natural phenomena. We can use science to explain what is happening around us such as the human reproductive system and climate change. For ages, science has been recognized as the best method to solve problems. For instance, scientists use science to find cures for every disease. This shows that science is mainly used in a good way, which is to give protection to human kind.  However, science can also be harmful. This problem takes place when people use science as a threat and menace to other people. The best example is the invention of weapons, especially nuclear bombs. These bombs were used in war as the fastest method to kill a great number of humans. Take for example World War II, when the United States dropped a plutonium implosion-type device code-named "Fat Man" on the city of Nagasaki, Japan. This bombing resulted in the death of around 120000 people and the majority of the dead were civilians. This justifies that science is not only good for mankind, but it can also cause massive destruction to mankind itself.

Akmal B Mohd Ihwan (June 08)