Home Discussion Forum Do you think that science is failing?

Do you think that science is failing?

The whole purpose of science is to discover the facts of the nature of our universe through controlled experiment and observation. So much knowledge has been obtained and so many myths have been put to rest since the dawn of the scientific age, however, the problems that science is facing this day in age are becoming increasingly more complex. Take for instance, string theory, and the search for the theory of everything. Do you think that our limited brain capacity as humans is far too primitave to understand “everything”? I’m not just referring to NOW. I’m also considering the continuing evolution of the human mind. Would you say that “everything” will always be one step ahead. And if so, do you forsee and impending spiritual awakening here on earth?


  1. I don’t think there is going to be a spiritual re-awakening. I believe people are going to someday get the idea we DON’T and probably never will understand everything. But we will be more clear on many mysteries. Wwe know, now, a lot more about the cosmos than we did 500 years ago. The questions will always arise no matter how much knowledge we gain. Knowledge only brings about more questions. We are beginning to accept that god is a myth from primitive mans beliefs. Those beliefs have changed and been proven wrong through the ages as we learned more and more. Because of this religions have changed to suit the times. Our minds will evolve as we learn.

  2. I think the problem is in our current methodology for dispensing information.
    The media tends to sensationalize EVERYTHING- they generally aim for a state of fear and uncertainty and hype every discovery with little context or supportinve data.
    They also tend to trivialize the imporant stuff, reducing things to soundbites and graphics.
    We also have a problem in schools where the sciences and rational thinking are not taught well- too much emphasis on rote learning or trying to jam tons of stuff in short semesters.
    Evolution is an example. It is taught rather superficially and is confused by all the ‘casual’ media presentations of the subject- cartoons and jokes about dinos and man co-existing, etc.
    Along comes a group with an agenda and a well-rehearsed spiel and they sway enough people that evolution is questioned on many levels. No one analyses the claims, no one bothers to reseach things- partly because of the slickness of the claim, but partly because we were NEVER taught to think that way!
    String theory and so forth are cool, but do not impinge on daily life at this point. I just wish we taught science, rational thinking, etc. enough that people would stop spending money on products that cannot POSSIBLY work as advertised!

  3. good question. sounds to me like u belive that WE HAVE FAILED science. perhaps, our civilizatiuon (like many before us) has plateaued in what we can achieve given our understanding/resources etc.
    the place of science in the past (i am talking pre-modern history) was to make the life of man better. there was a practical neccessity to alot of the inventions/discoveries. but now, our search/inventions appear gratuatious and perhaps that is why we have plateaued…..plus, don’t forget that we did not START anything, we just took already tried/established ideas and expanded on them.
    it is a good thing that science is always a step ahead of man because by his very nature, he is destructive…i.e. his EQ is not as evolved as his IQ. I do not forsee an “impending spiritual awakening”….we are incapable of such a thing for reasons already stated.

  4. You are at the dawn of a new age now. You now have the beginnings of the ability to evolve yourselves with the aid of genetic engineering, only morals and in some cases common sense stand in the way of you changing yourselves beyond anything that you currently recognize as human.
    Whether you will achieve this state of complexity before you wipe yourselves out with the misuse of the science you have already developed is still pretty much up in the air.
    The next stage in understanding the intricacies of science does lay with String Theory, but not necessarily with Quantum Mechanics, as there are some serious misconceptions within that science, and I think that you will find when humans finally get around to sorting out the bugs they currently have with their understandings on this subject then the answers will be a lot simpler than they currently appear to be.

  5. The “scientist” decides what information is likely to be “accepted” by the scientific community, observes what will be accepted, records it, and writes his paper from which he hopes to achieve recognition. If a real scientist (one with true scientific curiosity) observes, records, draws conclusions, and writes – or if he merely observes, records, and writes about what he has found – he must find a publisher who will publish his paper.
    The publisher is too lazy or too ignorant of true science to review any paper he receives for possible publication. So he passes the buck to the “peer reviewer” to make the decision.
    The “peer reviewer” is a competitor for scientific recognition. If the paper is such as to augment the reviewer’s reputation, he passes the paper back to the publisher for publication. If the paper might possibly upset the reviewer’s preconceived notions or his standing as an authority, he tells the publisher that the paper is not suitable for publication. Sometimes the “peer reviewer” denigrates the paper and steals the ideas in it for himself.
    There are other ways in which scientific progress is prevented. If the scientist is one without a scientific degree (especially a Ph.D.), he is not an authority and his work must not be published. To attain a Ph.D., a person must at least appear to believe everything his mentor tells him. His mentor must remain loyal to the accepted scientific dogma or be removed from his position. Those who decide the fate of the mentor (professor) must conform to accepted dogma or face removal from their positions. And once one does attain a Ph.D., he or she must be a true believer of the dogma to gain and maintain employment in his or her field.
    There is an “accepted” bureaucratic procedure for scientists to follow. If one step is left out, the scientist’s work is considered “unacceptable”. The accomplishment of that step is prevented by those in power. In short, every dirty trick devised by humans is employed within the scientific community. In this manner, scientific progress is and has been very effectively prevented. The result is over 100 years of scientific obstruction and misdirection which have led to the most bizarre fantasies and paradoxes imaginable.

  6. throughout time we have found that scientific theories have been disproved time and time again. this doesn’t mean we’re failing. we are learning by process of elimination. heck, the internet is science isn’t it?

  7. This is very good question to be asked after so much of time in science and technology. We have been reaping the benefits of science and technology but failed to understand what is life is for. At the present stage we know that each and every life on this earth requires some materials to survive, if they are not available in the form they are supposed to be that life perishes or some ailments may be there. We can attribute it to genetical disorder acquired disorders. Now there are environmental disorders along with other disorders to cope with. people are becoming bananas. Probably only spirituality may make some sense into people.

  8. I have good friends who succeed as interpreters in Europe. They did their undergraduate degrees inside overseas dialect they desire to succeed with, although consuming a few Linguistics lessons as their electives. Then, they do Master’s degrees in Translating. This is not my spot of interest, and I usually do not know of any North American universities that offer graduate applications in Translating.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here