In class we discussed about how in today's society, a lot of the scientists are controlled, making the controller more powerful than the scientist himself. However, when you think about it, the reason why the controller needs the scientist is because the scientist is more powerful than the controller. And since it is the scientist that actually controls the science that the controller wants, the scientist is in a more powerful position than the controller.
So in a way, it is the "controller" of the scientist that is being controlled by the scientist.
__________________________
Today, President Obama is considered as the most powerful man in America. It would seem that a regular scientist would not even be comparable to him in terms of power.
However, at some times it seems that Obama is being lead to act by science.
Let us for a moment pretend that a scientist working for the Department of Energy discovered a way to teleport. Since this would obviously be a security threat to the U.S. if the information was sold or leaked to another country, Obama would have to act in order to protect the U.S.. Although it may seem that Obama is controlling the scientist and the science through the protective measure he decides to employ, he is ultimately being controlled by the scientist because it is his science that caused Obama to act defensively.
In a way, Obama is being led by science.
Another example would be an Apple engineer creating a algorithm to improve the UI in the Ipad and then Steve Jobs would patent it and present it a a consumer electronic show. In this situation, Steve Jobs is being controlled by the flow of new technology. He isn't controlling it.
_______________________
If scientists are the ones that are actually controlling the "powerful" men and women, why are they not seen in that light in today's society? What defines power?
Posts
I thought it was interesting that you brought up the idea of power. In the presentation we are doing, I thought we could mention that power (the the desire of such) is the underlying cause for any competition between religion and science. (Quick note on definition of science-- for this, define science using Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's standards. That is, an elite society)
ReplyDeleteReligion and science seem to be the main governing authorities over societies. This being said, one without the other would mean complete control (or monopoly) by one such authority. This I believe could be a factor in the never-ending struggle for domination between religion and science; each one wants to be able to be in complete control (have total power) over society.
I think power is the ability to influence people and to have physical dominance. The biggest thing facing our everyday lives is politics, whether we realize it or not. All these different countries compete amongst each other politically and economically, and to have strong militaries to either exert dominance or resist pressure. This is where science comes into play. Science and technology are sort of the measure of the "muscle" of a nation. Scientific advancements lead to advanced weapons and militaries. This physical power can either be used for good or bad - conquest or defense. And history shows us many examples of both. Science also brings a core set of ideologies that ultimately influence peoples' thinking . Therefore, science has both, physical and mental power, which is why nations use it to advance in society. In the bigger scheme, scientific advancements remain on the political agenda, since it basically measures the “muscle”, and this power can be used for good or bad.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting point. In a lot of my classes I overhear a lot of foreigners and even some Americans that basically have this idea that the United States government is a one man band. I don’t know if they realize that many of the decisions that affect people and eventually cause problems are usually voted on by congress. In our government we have three branches of power: the legislative, judicial, and executive. In theory the three are suppose to check each other, but we know that is not always the case. While I do believe that it may seem that Obama is in control of everything and all powerful it is important to remember in a democracy the people hold the power! As to him being guided by others, this is totally possible. I think that today influence if everywhere. It is hard to not be totally neutral in any aspect of life, which includes scientists and even the president. We are all being influenced by each other and it can sometimes we don’t even know it. Some real life examples are advertisements on TV and in magazines. We usually ignore them but when we go shopping we remember the picture and decide to give the product a try. The same thing goes with ideas and discoveries. If we find out something revolutionary and try to draw some conclusions out of it; it will influence further research and even political leaders. The whole ordeal on green power and going zero emissions is a prime example. I am interested in what everyone has to say about this. So keep posting on this!
ReplyDelete