The Decline of Science and Technology in America 1347
puke76 writes "There's a good article over on the BBC about the decline of science and technology in the U.S.. Vint Cerf and others are going on record to voice their concerns about the current administrations recipe for 'irrelevance and decline.' Scientists are increasingly concerned about the White House's pandering to the religious right at science's expense. From the article: 'radically we have moved away from regulation based on professional analysis of scientific data ...to regulation controlled by the White House and driven by political considerations.'"
America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a saying that I hear a lot of religious people say: "You reap what you sow". Ironic then that in this case America gets precisely what it sows. You teach kids that ID is science and you get crappy scientists. You cut the percentage of GDP spent on RND and you get less nobel prize winners. You ignore the science of economics and you end up with a huge current account deficit which will take a decade to repay. You ignore the *fact* that human produced carbon dioxide is warming the earth and you wreck your environment just in time for your grandchildren.
America is at a cross-roads of sorts. It can choose to be the The Christian Republic of America or the United States of America. It seems as time goes on these options are becoming more and more mutually exclusive. The religious fanatics are intent on replacing the textbook with the Bible. The atheist fanatics (yes they do exist) are intent on removing any shred of religion from public life.
The next fifty years are going to be interesting. Will the US continue to train world class scientists and be a home for the creative? Or will the US sink in to irrevelence through placing religious dogma before pragmatism.
The condom policy in Africa makes me think the latter rather than the former.
Simon.
Brainwashed! (Score:5, Insightful)
The sad thing is many of these christian fanatics are uneducated, Rush Limbaugh/ Bill O'Reilly products (sculpted zombies) who's life doesn't stray further than Wal-Mart.
Seperate them! (Score:1, Insightful)
Science's Vitality (Score:5, Insightful)
I think this is a key point. And not just public support for science and government funding, but the motivation of young people going into the field is critically important to whether or not scientific effort actually makes a difference in the real world. Are there real world problems (like the problems that led to development of
radar and computing in WWII, or the needs of cold war espionage and besting the Soviets post-Sputnik) that captivate people's attention? If the critical needs are there, that ensures both public support, government funding, and highly motivated researchers bringing real advances.
And we do have critical needs for R&D work right now - renewable energy [energybulletin.net] probably most critical. Developing things further in space is a challenge that needs our best efforts now too. But our government and media, and even places reflective of geek opinion like slashdot, spend a lot of effort downplaying the seriousness of problems like oil depletion and
global warming. People can't be motivated to do anything about it if most of the country thinks it's not really a problem at all.
How can it not decline? (Score:4, Insightful)
Corporations (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
How long could our high tech army, navy and air force equipment stay operational if the Chinese refused to export any electronics?
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent is insightful, not flamebait. For a good example of what happens when science and enlightenment are replaced by theology and repression, just look at the Middle East. The Arab world was the cornerstone of world civilization in the Middle Ages -- they invented the zero, we still use Arabic digits, they were astronomers and mathematicians, and they initiated the Renaissance by preserving ancient Greek and Roman writings. But they let all that slip and became mostly a bunch of backward theocracies instead. America is next if it continues on this road.
Fix the delusions (Score:4, Insightful)
Certainly any American is capable of being the best, and is more likely to acheive that given good opportunities and education, and a culture that values whatever endeavor they choose. For science and technology, that's just not valued much by our culture. Americans like entertainment and instant gratification, and think the more of that they have the better they will be.
I fear for our future.
Get off the political troll.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, the more we blame this situation on religious/anti-religous bugaboos and other flamefests, and not on THE WAY WE RAISE OUR KIDS nothing will ever change.
How many of you (or your wives for that matter) get on their childs teacher's case for being "too hard on my kid", "they just aren't good at math" etc. and not the other way around?
Why do you think Asians kick so much ass in the sciences and tech fields? Because they believe in hard work and challenge their kids (granted, maybe too much sometimes)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe more researchers need to take up golf (Score:4, Insightful)
So don't expect them to give a crap about the cost to science by doing what the religous right demands, cause they need them to be in power in the first place.
Now if they could find a way to launder money out of R&D, like the defense, pharma, or oil industries, then you might get somewhere.
Maybe some R&D project managers need to take
Jack Abramoff or Tom DeLay [msn.com] out for a few rounds of golf...
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
What do you think America has been that last 200 years? Christian-Judism has always had a strong influence on America the influence is less and les each year.
Do you think the ten commandants were recently put up in court houses? Do you think pray in school is a recent thing.
Do you the Bibles being taken out of school is a recent thing?
When was the Conressional minister put in place?
And yet somehow over the last 200 years America was at the fore front of science and technology.
Take any shred of religion out of the government, but don't tell me our forefathers or constitution says it should be that way.
Patents (Score:3, Insightful)
Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
If not that, they ended up running universities where their business depends on having more science students to
Then they get stressed out that my kids look around at their father and his cow-orkers stressing over whose job is the next to vanish. They look at the management, lawyers, and politicians getting wealthier and more powerful every year, and shock! they decide not to go into tech.
Here's the paradox: they want the best and brightest to make life decisions that they themselves saw as foolish.
Re:Religion holding us back as usual (Score:1, Insightful)
Christianity versus global warming (Score:2, Insightful)
To see this in action, compare any "Intelligent Design" related article on Slashdot to any article in some way related to global warming. We don't have a lot of hardline Christians on slashdot, so in the former article will have a very "trust science, evidence and reason over faith" slant in the comments. However we do have a lot of hardline libertarians. So look in the latter article and you will find one of the greatest torrents of anti-intellectual anti-science sentiment imaginable. As soon as it comes up that all available evidence makes it quite clear that human-produced greenhouse gases are causing global climate change with negative effects, suddenly we are presented with people insisting that reality is ephermal, nothing is knowable, and rather than do risky things like attempt to regulate polluting businesses we should just have faith that our actions will not have faith on the world around us. After all, it is not like climatology or chemistry are hard sciences, like the economic science is which Milton Friedman has used to conclude that governmental regulations universally and always cause harm.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You teach kids that ID is science and you get crappy scientists.
Where is ID being taught?
Private Catholic schools (for instance) have higher aptitude scores for math and science. Public schools do not teach ID.
The state of public schools in America can hardly be blamed on religion since religion plays an infinitesimal part of the curriculum. Teaching to the lowest common denominator along with a general malaise in interest in science among kids is a much larger part of the determination of the curriculum.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh blah blah blah. People say this every generation, because they don't realize people have said it every generation. America is always at some kind of crossroads. And you know what? It usually comes out pretty okay.
The political pendulum swings back and forth. Always has. But this country has never been particularly liberal, except maybe for a brief period in the late 1960's and early 1970's that was mainly a reaction to the Vietnam War (and the same thing may happen again in a few years). People talk about how even Democrats today are basically conservatives - well, who the hell do you think dropped the atom bomb on Japan? It wasn't a Republican.
The point being, this is a conservative country. Get used to it. It's always been that way, going back to its founding - remember, this country exists because people needed somewhere to go to practice their religion. The freedom to not practice religion was added later.
This is not to say I share this view - on most issues (not all), I'm about as liberal as it gets in this country. But I've been around long enough to see several swings of the pendulum, to live through several wars, and to know that nothing that's going on right now is really all that unusual in the grand scheme of things. Sure, if you take a 10 year view, things aren't so hot right now for us liberals and scientific thinkers. Maybe even with a 50 year view we'd be at or near a low point. But those of us who lived through Vietnam (and I was young, but I do remember it) and the aftermath know how bad things can really get in terms of ideology, the economy, and yes, even science. This that we're in now, this is nothing. A blip on the radar.
So, before you come up with these dramatic proclamations about how America's at a "crossroads" and you predict we'll take the wrong path and eventually fade into irrelevance, remember all the times people before you said those exact same things, and remember how dumb they sounded even five years later.
America is simply doing what it always does, going through the motions of trying to find a balance of values that appeals to its people. Those values may not be your values, but they're really no different than ever. It's a balance that can never truly be attained, though, so you will see things shift back and forth periodically. We are just at the extreme edge of one of those shifts right now, but from a historical viewpoint I really don't see that this is anything unusual.
Re:Religion holding us back as usual (Score:3, Insightful)
Ummmmm. they did a few hundred years back.
http://pilgrims.net/plymouth/history/mayflower.ht
Re:Corporations (Score:1, Insightful)
Who are the shareholders? Look around you... it's all of us.
Short term corporate thinking is just a reflection of the tolerances of the culture within which the corporation exists.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
We can't live without them, and they can't live without us.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Again (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Religion holding us back as usual (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:1, Insightful)
But you can keep reciting the propaganda of the rank and file: "We're a democracy". It may help you feel better, but it doesn't change the truth: The government directly decides what you do with about 50% of your paycheck and, of the other 50%, they have entire libraries devoted to regulating how you're allowed to spend it.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
You've got to be fucking kidding me.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
The Founding Fathers seemed to think differently:
"[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom ... was
finally passed, ... a singular proposition proved that its
protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble
declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the
holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting
the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a
departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our
religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof
that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the
Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the
Hindoo and infidel of every denomination."
Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, 1821.
"The clergy, by getting themselves established by law, and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man. They are still so in many countries and even in some of these United States. Even in 1783, we doubted the stability of our recent measures for reducing them to the footing of other useful callings. It now appears that our means were effectual."
Thomas Jefferson, 1800
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."
James Madison, 1785
"As I have now given you my reasons for believing that the Bible is not the Word of God, that it is a falsehood, I have a right to ask you your reasons for believing the contrary; but I know you can give me none, except that you were educated to believe the Bible; and as the Turks give the same reason for believing the Koran, it is evident that education makes all the difference, and that reason and truth have nothing to do in the case. You believe in the Bible from the accident of birth, and the Turks believe in the Koran from the same accident, and each calls the other infidel. But leaving the prejudice of education out of the case, the unprejudiced truth is, that all are infidels who believe falsely of God, whether they draw their creed from the Bible, or from the Koran, from the Old Testament, or from the New."
"It is often said in the Bible that God spake unto Moses, but how do you know that God spake unto Moses? Because, you will say, the Bible says so. The Koran says, that God spake unto Mahomet, do you believe that too? No. Why not? Because, you will say, you do not believe it; and so because you do, and because you don't is all the reason you can give for believing or disbelieving except that you will say that Mahomet was an impostor. And how do you know Moses was not an impostor?"
Thomas Paine, 1797
"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."
George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli
You know what's missing from American education besides a good grounding in the sciences? Even the tiniest bit of knowledge as to the opinions, beliefs and motives of the Founding Fathers, who must stand as being the most misunderstood men in history.
Re:Brainwashed! (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you need some education about what mormonism is and what they really believe in.
Your education begins here: http://www.exmormon.org/ [exmormon.org]
Learn. I generally hate to make sweeping statements about any group of people, but mormons are quite fucked up.
I'm a Christian, and this scares me to death (Score:5, Insightful)
I am disturbed as a a scientist because it's holding us back, and educating our kids with BS, and I'm disturbed as a Christian because this is not Christianity, at least not of the mainstream portion. And most Christians are too afraid to stand up and say anything at the wholesale hijacking of their faith. (I wonder if this is how Muslims feel) Please, slashdotters, don't paint with a broad brush Christians as being like.....this.......
The "meat" of Christian teachings are _not_ incompatible with evolution, the big bang, modern society in general, etc, etc.
Voted for Bush the first time around, voted libertarian on try number 2.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Considering the large number of Atheists and Deists that were amoung their ranks, I'd say the only reason they DIDN'T say it should be that way was because it wasn't a popular opinion. It still isn't.
Of the brightest minds I've come upon, almost all have been Atheists, Agnostic, or Deist. Few would admit it publically, however, in fear of creating enemies in the religious fanatics that abound.
In our line of work, that kind of tension in the work place is very dangerous.
It's kind of sad when you're smarter, nicer, more honest, and better educated than the many people around you, yet you have to conceal your true beliefs out of fear of persecution.
The Constitution grants us the freedom to believe (or NOT) as we choose. Why then is it that despite your claims that the religious influence is shrinking that it becomes more and more difficult (and more dangerous) to openly proclaim one's Atheism?
When our government takes actions influenced by religious beliefs they are essentially denying the Athiests their rights. Not imposing those beliefs on the masses does not hinder one's right to worship. Figure it out. There is only one constitutionally correct way to handle this, religious people just don't care about anyone else's rights but their own. Somewhat ironic, I would say.
Posting AC for obvious reasons...
Re:Get off the political troll.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Mod up, bro! That is the nail (i.e. you've hit it on the head). Aside from Bush and other problems, kids just don't want to work. Fewer kids go into science and engineering every year.
The old tradition, and really what built America, was that your great+grandparents immigrated and worked like dogs/died like dogs (viva Upton Sinclair). Then their kids had it a little better. And so on, until we get kids who are disconnected from hard work and suffering. Who, really, won't do anything if it is too hard or not immediately fun or gratifying.
If you work in the science/eng fields you probably see this. My company talks about the problems of losing too many employees in the next ten years to retirement and not having enough replacements (very few people under 30). I have friends who think that business statistics is a really hard course. Unlike my peers in college who regularly pulled all nighters to study or finish projects.
I think Cerf is right, though. This is really like Daniel: this is just the writing on the wall. It is really too late. Bush, Hollywood, and the sucess of our parents have made a generation that may be too lazy to save.
And I am not anti-American by any means. I just think that this culture of true love, self fulfillment, avoidance of suffering has made us too soft to survive.
Re:Seperate them! (Score:4, Insightful)
Somebody please mod this back down. If the poster wants to make an insightful comment he/she can give some information to support it, as the child posters supported their claims to the contrary.
Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
I stay out of peoples bedrooms and churchs, for the very reason that I don't want others in mine!
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Not actually familiar with history, are you? (Score:5, Insightful)
What you are saying, that America has always been a Christian nation the way it is today, is a nice little fairy tale, but it simply isn't true. Members of the Christian political movement that have hijacked America's politics in the last 45 years try to pretend that the spot they hold is their divine right and that they have always held it, that oceania has always been at war with eurasia, but the fact is a political member of the SBC stranded 200 years ago would be nothing but a ranting street preacher. Drop them 225 years ago among the deist-packed "founding fathers" that people are always trying to lay claim to, and they'd be even worse off...
Take any shred of religion out of the government, but don't tell me our forefathers or constitution says it should be that way.
Our "forefathers" and the constitutional law they wrote say it should be that way, in very specific terms:
Corporate idiocy (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Focus on short term profits over long term profits.
2. Management by MBAs that have no technical understanding, and cannot understand technical subjects, nor key trends and drivers in an industry.
3. Rampant cost-cutting, to the point of providing legacy computers to their employees.
4. Hiring incompetent, wannabe techies with no mastery of technical subjects or even the motivation to learn.
5. Lack of vision for developing core capabilities to market leading potentials
6. Revenue-stream milking, to the detriment of all other activities
I think the parent poster is very accurate. If there is a problem, it is our litigation prone society that rewards lawyers over engineers and scientists, exponentially. Our innovators should be better compensated, and the tort/IP system reformed.
That would be a start in the right direction. I'd like the Bush administration to change those problems first.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem has nothing to do with religion - its about lowered standards of quality in American culture. Does the religious right let Bush get away with anything he wants? Sure. But religion only happens to fit into the model because that's Bush's demographic. Nixon's demographic let him get away with anything he wanted, just like Clinton's, Reagan's and Johnson's did. Voters rarely turn on the guy they put into office. Bad Presidents always reflect poorly on the individuals who support them, but that doesn't mean that the ideas that bind the demographic are neccesarily invalid simply for that reason.
Stem cell research is a relgious / science overlap. Intelligent Design is a ridiculous idea from a very very small minority in Kansas. Past that, I don't see much overlap from religion in science in America. Sure, the conservative party is playing down environmental research, but that has nothing to do with religion - that's a culture of corporate profits interfering with science.
You blame religion for the decrease in American science - I blame the media. I blame CNN for undercovering important issues, and spending two weeks on a runaway bride. I blame Disney for making a movie about a girl who is interested in science and math and is unpopular until she decides to drop it all and become an ice skater. I blame television networks that make 10,000 reality tv shows and 5,000 Ally McBeal spinoffs for every one Numbers or... well, I can't think of another show I like on network tv. How about the fact that TLC found it was much more profitable to stop showing documentaries and focus on home decorating shows? I also blame underfunded schools and a corporate culture that has dropped R&D in favor of easier methods of reducing profits.
Simply blaming religion is insulting to those of us who are thoughtfully religious, and worse than that, its wrong.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
America has never had a problem with being Christian and being a science and technology leader. Scientists often have religious or quasi-religious motivations. They want to know how the world that God created works. Truth be told, environmentalists are more of a threat to science and technology (pollution! frankenfood! mutant children!) than religious fundamentalists.
All in all the idea that those nice Chinese and Indian people can handle all that hard stuff for us is probably the most pernicious problem. America just doesn't want to do great things anymore, it just wants to be fat and happy, and will let those more motivated people do the hard stuff.
Re:Get off the political troll.. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a deep cultural thing though. I am a mathematician and I can't tell you how many time I've had a conversation that went
Person: So what do you do?
Me: I'm a mathematcian.
Person: Oh, I was never any good at math in school.
And that last point is always said with almost an air of superiority, like there's an underlying "I didn't do well at math and I'm successful, why did you waste your time?" - often enough people will actually come out and say that too. I'm sure any other mathematicians here on Slashdot can testify to much the same thing. There is a deep deated cultural belief that mathematics isn't important - is it any suprise teachers and parents pass that attitude on to their kids?
Jedidiah.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, this is a good sign, since private Catholic schools teach the theory of evolution.
Re:Fix the delusions (Score:2, Insightful)
We have become a nation of ignorant slackers.
We are prime targets for demagogues like Bush, O'Reilly, Limbaugh, etc. Who all prey upon our ignorance and insecurities.
Though, I doubt that Europe is much better... Just a different set of players.
Re:Corporations (Score:3, Insightful)
Who are the shareholders? Look around you... it's all of us."
Now THERE'S a joke! Forst, the idea that Boards answer to shareholders -- you don't know much about these issues, do you? Do you know about the recent replacement of the SEC head BECAUSE they want less accountability to shareholders?
Do you know that something like 95% of the SHARES of public corporations are owned by about 2% of the public. The rest of the shares are divided up among the next 30% or so, and then a very, very small percentage of ownership spreads past that.
Re:Corporations (Score:2, Insightful)
If you see more construction cranes in China, have you thought about what stage their society's at? It's rapidly developing, and starting from a less developed point. Of course they're building more stuff, but they're still a looong way away from U.S. infrastructure. Maybe another reason is that China isn't full of stupid collectivists who raise an uproar any time a developer tries to build something
As for long-term research, well, where do you think cures for AIDS, cancer, etc., are likely to come from? Or new discoveries in physics? Etc., etc., it's all pretty obvious, hence my pointing out how stupid your post was.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think people just need a scapegoat, and blaming things on the religious right is currently in vogue.
Greenhouse gasses accumulating in the atmosphere? It's the religious zealots pumping out all those CFCs.
Economy in a slump? It must be those ignorant religious fanatics.
So what would happen if we got someone in the White House who was the total opposite of GBW? Evidently, all our problems would go away: Terrorists would stop hating us, the economy would boom, parents would get their children interested in the sciences, everyone could smoke weed any time they wanted, and there would be world peace and flowers for all, because everything would be funded and subsidized by the government.
science and evolution are not concerned with god (Score:4, Insightful)
the only people that i see bringing god into scientific debates are fanatics trying to prove god's existance through non-scientific methods and logical fallacies while claiming it as science [eg intelligent design].
this does not make it science.
evolutionists have no opinion on god from a scientific point of view.
sum.zero
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
No so much. Most of the founders were Deists [dim.com], and the intelligentsia who until relatively recently did most of the governing were less religious then most of the population. Evangelical and fundamentalist religion has much more political power today than in the past.
I'll tell you just that. The constitution has Amendment I. An early treaty ratified under John Adams states "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion". Madison said "Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's look at history. Arguably, the era experiencing the greatest innovations in science and technology was from the mid 17th century to the middle of the 19th. You've got Newton and Liebniz and Hooke and all those other Royal Society guys rewriting every bit of our knowledge of how the world works -- and doing so under the authority of a state and church with far, far more control then the US government has ever had.
The second greatest technical period is probably from WWII through the 1960s in America -- especially the 1950s when we developed and perfected nuclear power, jet aircraft, rocketry, computers, etc; and all in a far more controlled society. Heck, the 50s US has become the cliche of an uptight, religous, puritanical society. Yet we grew by leaps and bounds.
Besides, the whole "intelligent design" stuff, where it affects anything it affects pure science. And pure science very rarly is the driver of much of anything. Where the technical fields impact our lives is through engineering. It's making science practical. And that's something that the evolution vs ID really has no impact on.
But engineering really is in dire, dire straits in this country, but for completely differnt (almost opposite) reasons. Primarily, in my mind, because of the stiffling of innovation because of government regulation and excessive lawsuits. When you codify everything, mandate everything, and ban everything else then there is no room to innovate and do new things. It's the Democrats and their state-controlled regulatory state that has stiffled the technical fields, not the religious right.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you kidding? (Score:1, Insightful)
The poster demonstrates ignorance of the effect Christianity had on learning in Europe.
Re:Brainwashed! (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course, one of the Bible stories says that if you don't at least put your money in the bank, you'll be punished. Nowadays, you'll lose it all to "service charges" if you do so.
Even so, it is indirectly mentioned in the bible - Jesus was dared by the devil to jump from the roof of the Jerusulum temple. It indicates that one should not foolishly place their faith in God helping them whenever.
Re:SSC (Score:4, Insightful)
Country is bleeding cash to foreign nations, country is insanely in debt, oil costs a fortune, christian religious dogma dictates public policy, record high unemployment, health care is unaffordable, we've off shored most of our manufacturing, stem cells are no considered babies, ass backwards tort reform, bullshit patriot acts by a republican government no less (the irony is fucking histerical)...
Oh the list goes on, and its retarded. There isnt a single GOOD thing that has come from this administration, other than perhaps "we invaded Afghanistan" but yet, havent gotten Bin Laden.
Our current goverment is a joke. They're incapable of doing anything AND that includes the democrats that are in office as well. They're lame and weak.
The republicans know how to fight, but they have no clue how to run a country. They certainly are good at giving government hand outs ot their rich friends though.
And that is a big issue.
So lets not talk about Clinton. Lets talk about the assholes in power RIGHT NOW.
Re:Get off the political troll.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Good point. It's a cultural problem to a large extent. Kids who like Math and Science are considered geeks, nerds, etc. (There's a case to be made that there exists a genetic/neurological phenotype which is both good with analytical thinking, and not that good socially.) Geeks aren't popular, hence many stay away from Math and Science. I bet it's not the same in Asia for the most part.
Re:Corporations (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't think so. Last time I checked, most cutting edge science is done by the government. There is little immediate profit in fundamental research. Two of the biggest examples are the military and the space program. Almost all of out technology that we use today can be traced back to one of those two groups. Another source for research are government funded universities and/or government grants at universities.
Most industrial development is ultimately driven by companies looking to make money on new technologies.
Yup. They bring the stuff to our living rooms by mass production and making things affordable for the general public.
Until corporate America can look past next quarter's numbers, R&D will not really exist in the U.S. anymore.
Maybe this is a lull in the R&D market, but its typical for a larger company to spend about 10% on R&D.
As much as I despise the military, it serves a great purpose for people to dig into their pockets out of fear. As much as I distrust the government, they do have a way of providing funding for many smart people to do things that they could not do on their own or at a private corporation. Its just a necessary evil I guess.
Why be a scientist? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you become a PhD scientist, you will not get through your now essentially-mandatory post-docs until after you are thirty years old. Depending on your field, you can then expect to start at a salary of $60-80k.
On the other hand, a typical lawyer is out of school at age 25 and already makes a higher salary than the PhD will. Yes, they have a larger debt but it is only about a year's salary. Also, the lawyer does not have to worry much about someone from China or India replacing him at a third the price.
Economically, it does not make sense for a bright young American to choose science. We should not be surprised when few do.
Re:Are you kidding? (Score:1, Insightful)
Is that the same Galileo that had his book banned and was forced to recant his scientific findings by the Inquisition?
While i am thinking about it, you must not mean the same Darwin whose theories are utterly refuted by Christians and rate #1 on most Christians "why we hate science" checklist?
Re:Anti-Intelligence Re: Bush (Score:3, Insightful)
Scien is not truth. Science is discovery through scientific methods.
Nothing evolves just randomly, and if you think thats what evolution is, then you are very misguided.
Evolution is NOT RANDOM CHANCE.
Modern American science due to big wars (Score:2, Insightful)
There's a good article over on the BBC about the decline of science and technology in the U.S.
I think most technological advancements in the U.S. came about as a result of large wars. Technological advancements in electronics, aviation, ballistics, space travel and satellite saw huge increases as a direct result of World War II and the Cold War (I'm tossing the Vietnam War in as part of the Cold War).
And we've always distrusted science. This isn't the first time around for a legislated solution to the 'question' of evolution. The Scopes Trial happened in the mid 1920s.
Nuclear energy in American today is also a reflection of the distrust in science (stemming from ignorance or not).
Maybe Americans have always been distrustful of science. The lack of defense spending in the past 20 years could explain the slow down in technological advances as well.
Re:Are you kidding? (Score:3, Insightful)
What learning? Most monks were illiterate scribes who learned to copy letters without ever learning how to read.
The real intended role of monestaries was to keep anyone remotely intelligent away from the general public where he might go starting trouble by speaking out against the Church. If you keep all the remotely bright people lured away, and force them to dedicate their life to the Church in order to learn anything, you can control them: and control of the masses was and is the purpose of Christianity since it's inception.
It's hard NOT to blame the Christian for the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings: they perpetuated that statement for thousands of years. The founding fathers were literally traitors of their day; not only to their King, but to their God as well. God had appointed King George to rule over them, and god-fearing men obeyed. Only evil heretics like Franklin and Jefferson dared rebelagainst the divine goodness incarnate in royalty. Or so said the Christians.
They claimed it was God who appointed the Kings, and it was a heresy against God to argue against the Church.
Newton, Darwin, and Galileo didn't have the choice to reject Christianity: when you face death for being an atheist, it's not a good idea to argue against a God. In England, the early copyright laws were formed to keep unpopular writings supressed: pornographic, heretical, and atheistic statements were illegal, and you could be killed for it.
Even today, there are still laws against blasphemy on the books in the USA, Canada, and Great Britan. Even today, there is little freedom against this religion.
As a boy,I was forced to worship the Christian's God, in my public school, funded by the public's tax dollars. If anything should be free of the taint of religious brainwashing, it should be a house of education, but no, the Christians got there first.
Catholics in my province get special treatment under the law; Catholic schools get public funding, unlike any other religious school in the country.
It's unfair, but that's Christianity. Claim what they will, they're only out for the power. When your starting premise is a lie, it's not surprising that many of them learned to lie to themselves as well.
--
AC
Catch #22 (Score:1, Insightful)
What we are really witnessing is the takeover of humanity by the corporations:
The mega-corps dictate terms and conditions regarding employment and subsistence of the citizens to governments with impunity, if the local yokels, be it county, state or an entire nations governing body make waves, well... the source of employment can move to localities more malleable to the forces of "progress"
Truthfully, how many of us reflect on the fact that the very shiny, very cool, very indispensible objects we caress (talking to geeks here, normals please ignore), are tainted by being assembled by people working in what we ourselves would deem sub-human conditions regarding pay, working-hours and job-security?
(... sorry to be such an insensitive clod to those working for outstanding game production outfits)
Let us name as examples predatory corporations of the present time such as Monsanto and Microsoft while keeping a clear head, realizing that such entities are hostage to their own success and must forge forward with ever-increasing vigour, swallowing and/or disrupting targets that can affect the bottom line.
While such virulent behaviour is acceptable to many, the history of human achievments does show a prevalance of individual invention over large-scale research.
As the workforce in other locations reach the lowest common corporate qualification so must the corporations migrate the actual jobs available in the enterprise...
The actual catch #22 is the fact that the established entities do their best to smother or assimilate anything new so by the mere fact of progressing any project must eventually become evil... or what??? please do tell
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
However, I think the problem is when a religious institution no longer concerns itself with helping people but decides that it should dictate to people that we are in trouble. I'll go so far as to apply this to all systems of belief that fall into the religious catagory. If the system of belief must protect itself by demanding that people act in a certain way and seek the power of the government to enforce that behavior, that system of belief should be burned at the stake.
But then, what do I know. I was raised a conservative Christian, but God and I have our doubts about each other.
Religion my ass!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
What is relevant, is that they knew first hand what kind of problems limiting religious freedom generated, so they made a big point of ensuring nobody in this experiment we call The United States of America would be persecuted or discriminated against for his religious beliefs, or lack thereof.
Sadly, the GOP of late seems to ignore the "lack thereof" part, and in many instances the "religious beliefs" part as well if it doesn't match the distorted ideas they have of what Christianity should be.
Freedom of religion means you can subscribe to any faith you want, or none at all. Freedom of religion also means freedom FROM religion.
It also means the government does not have the right to encourage religion over none, or one religion over another. This is exactly why the 1st amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
Translation: No laws can be made that specifically discriminate against or benefit religion or religious beliefs.
Injecting religion into poltics is an extremely bad idea.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Are the domestic defense contractors in turn required to buy only domestic? Are they required to buy domestic steel? The latter is an area of American self-sufficiency that particularly worries me at the moment, though i don't know if it applies to the military.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that I'm 100% negative about this religion. There is no doubt that the US has been economically successful as a result and that the liberties of Americans are at least on a par with some European countries.
Re:Well what the fuck is BRITAIN doing about it!?! (Score:1, Insightful)
So in other words, you think the people in the UK should work harder to cover up studies about multimillion dollar drugs, spend more time selling barges to each other, and otherwise screwing things up so they can be Just Like Us?
Re:Today, Class, We Will Study "Zeitgeist" (Score:3, Insightful)
Was Paine wrong re Religion? Were Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, et. al. right? A discussion for a different thread, and I've argued both sides in my days. But there can really be no argument that the Money-Head folks intended a prominent and positive role for religion in their new nation's development. The warping of the Constitution's 'Establishment Clause' which prevents the Feds from creating a national religion into something blocking local municipalities from putting up creches or ten commandments or magic groves in their public parks if enough townies want them is just perverse.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
It also means the government does not have the right to encourage aetheism over religion
Government itself must be atheist. Not atheist in the "there is no god" sense but in the sense of "matters of god are irrelevant to the operation of government." Way too many people think that refusing to get involved in the debate is actually some bias towards atheism when nothing could be farther from the truth.
These are the same people who think that government must acknowledge christianity but refuse to consider what it would mean if their government were to acknowledge something like buddhism or salafism instead - claiming that the US is a christian nation so that would never happen with blinders firmly attached.
Something to consider when choosing careers... (Score:3, Insightful)
When I'm onsite, I'm one of the lucky engineers because I get paid a straight time overtime rate (divide my salary by 2000 hours per year, and they give me that much for each overtime hour while I'm on the road for 2 to 4 months a year - not time and a half, just straight time). Many of the other engineers doing a similar job do not get this.
Meanwhile, when I go onsite to a unionized factory to install this equipment, I need to have a union electrician with me all the time. This is because I can't plug in my laptop because I'm not qualified, so I need to have an electrician do that for me, or at least be present when I do it. Also, I can't use an electrical meter to measure voltages in MY machine that I'm installing for them, so I have to get them to hold the meter and probes for me.
98% of the time I don't need these services, so the union electrician sits beside me reading a newspaper. I don't have a problem with this because generally they're nice guys, and they are skilled, but here's the kicker:
They didn't have to get a 4 or 5 year electrical engineering degree. They can't do my job, but I'm actually overqualified for their job... and while he's sitting there reading the newspaper, he makes 50% to 100% more per year than I do, even though I'm paid respectably based on salaries quoted on salary.com for my area.
I like my job, but the financial incentive clearly tells me I should have gone for the 2 year college course to be an electrician and gotten hired to a union shop.
That's where the science and technology edge has gone. An average American in a factory makes $22 to $45 an hour, and you wonder why the country can't compete with India and China for manufacturing jobs?
I can go online and hire 2 or 3 Indians to play my MMO game for me for a total of $1.50 an HOUR to power level my character. If there was free trade in the world, the western nations would be SCREWED.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: Christians like Newton, Darwin and Galileo. (Score:3, Insightful)
Christianity isn't one monolithic entity.. never has been... there's always been a strong pro-learning streak in it (spreading education throughout the world, establishing hospitals - we still have 'sisters' in hospitals today even though they're not nuns any more), and there's always been the stuck up gits who care more about their own power than anything else.
Actually not much different from today... they call them Senators now not Bishops, but the principle is the same.
Most Muslims still consider usury a big no-no. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yea, it's rather ironic that one of Citibank's biggest stockholders is a Saudi prince.
the Spanish Empire under the Inquisition
When Queen Isabela demanded that Jews, Sephardim [wikipedia.org] and Muslims, Spanish Moors [wikipedia.org] either convert to Christianity or leave the Iberian Peninsula [wikipedia.org] suffered a massive brain drain. It was mostly Jews and Moors that were educated in the different kingdoms of Iberia, most of which become Spain.
Falcon+5 Insightful??? (Score:2, Insightful)
America is always at some kind of crossroads. And you know what? It usually comes out pretty okay.
Talk to anyone in their 70s. They will all say the political climate today is INSANE. That politics around Vietnam were nowhere near as corrupted as things are today. We have religious right senators talking at Baptist Conventions on Sundays during the services, for peats sake, trying to build an extreme view of religion into the goverment. Our President, despite turning the world into a terror-filled place takes the longest vacations in US Presidential history. He should be impeached, but our own congress is too scared for their selfish reasons to stand up against this guy. Bush's actions have killed more Muslims/persons than Bin Laden, or Saddam. This will never be reported in the US news, though the entire world knows this. It's true- add it up. Why do you think everyone hates us? The conservatives are against abortion but don't mind at all killing 10's of thousands of Iraqi women and children, almost 2,000 US soldiers, or anyone else. I have yet to understand how that is in any way 'morals.'
The point being, this is a conservative country. Get used to it. It's always been that way, going back to its founding - remember, this country exists because people needed somewhere to go to practice their religion. The freedom to not practice religion was added later.
You couldn't be more wrong. Read the Declaration of Independence [indiana.edu] sometime and get back to me. This country was formed by persons RUNNING AWAY from crazy rulers/dicators like BUSH. LIBERAL. How more liberal can you get other than leaving across the Atlantic Ocean to get away from over-ruling leaders? If you read this document outloud on a public news station, you would probably be arrested under the Patriot Act. Read it- though I know no conservatives believe in this document, sadly enough.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
"...before you come up with these dramatic proclamations...remember all the times people before you said those exact same things, and remember how dumb they sounded even five years later..."
This argument reminds me of the story of the guy who fell off the top of the Empire State Building. As he passed the 90th floor, he was heard to mutter, "Well, ninety floors and I'm still okay!"
Re:Brainwashed! (Score:2, Insightful)
WTF do Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly have to do with Christianity?
Jefferson said the Bible was a dungheap (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Science's Vitality (Score:3, Insightful)
Well then its a good thing that the government considers the fight against terrorism a war.
Let me see if I get this guy's argument. Bush is against science, specifically in his words, "not just on global warming and stem cells, currently in the news, but on a whole range of issues - lead and mercury poisoning in children, women's health, birth control, safety standards for drinking water, forest management, air pollution and on and on". So as a result, again in his words, "young Americans are opting for better paid law and medicine over science and engineering (jobs)...". Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most of those areas of science have more to do medicine than engineering? If all young Americans were just following this guy's perception of Bush's views on science, then shouldn't we be seeing a decline in the number of Americans studying medicine and an increase in the number of Americans studying engineering to go work for defense contractors?
Isn't a more plausible explanation that the rest of the world is catching up in science and engineering and that American's are free to disagree with their president?
Re:Are you kidding? (Score:1, Insightful)
Hang on just a sec, you are actually doing to sit there and say the church did anything but convict Galileo for heresy? That is what they did. They suppressed his science because it didn't conform to their beloved world view. The same things happened with Copernicus and Kepler. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo [wikipedia.org]
and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler [wikipedia.org]
and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernicus [wikipedia.org]
The fact of the matter is that Religion particularly Christianity and Science have been locked in and ideological war forever and they always will be. With the Christian conservatives/Fundamentalists/Radicals/Hardliners
Arrgh! Why why why must we put up with this superstitious mumbo jumbo in government and schools. That kind of crap should only be talked about where it belongs: In church.
Re:Are you kidding? (Score:3, Insightful)
No argument that Christian Europe (and its American black sheep cousin) eventually became a technological and philosophical master of the world, but lets not glorify early Christianity as anything more, in the main, than nasty, brutish, and cruel.
Re:LOL @ Joe Wilson (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if the things the Republicans said *were* true (something I dispute), did it justify breaking the law? Did it justify the risking of the lives of other operatives and associates that worked for and with the Brewster-Jennings cover organization? Or is it OK to break the law in the name of political expediancy if you are a Republican administration official? What a fscking moron.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
As for the 'use imports and save domestic resources', how long does it take to go from located ore deposit to functioning steel plant? A long time.
Re:Brainwashed! (Score:4, Insightful)
2 & 3. Capital punishment mostly features in the old testament, while Jesus preaches a very different approach. Can you explain how:
"38 You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."
Means what you claim rather than having compassion even for those who wrong you? It would seem to be to be saying that "an eye for an eye" is wrong, and that we should have compassion and understanding even for those who try to hurt us.
Jedidiah.
Re:Are you kidding? NO! (Score:3, Insightful)
Isaac Newton was a Unitarian [wikipedia.org], thanks very much. Like his friend John Locke. Please get your facts straight before accusing others of ignorance.
Have there been bad Christians? Yes. Have there been good ones too? Most definately. You can't point to any group that big and say they're all the same, just like you can't do that with blacks or women.
This prize bollocks (Score:5, Insightful)
TOOO shows how auto-catalytism of peptides (tiny tiny molecules, 2 amino-acids or more, occur in non-living natural form etc.) could have formed the primeval building blocks. He provides a testable model for it. The test works. He uses the results to validate his model and then demonstrates the implications of those results.
One of the fundamental theses within TOOO is that of interconnection and interaction. A massive neural network without any connectivity is completely useless, make it highly connected and you end up with a brain. The same principles can apply to the evolution of life itself - interaction is the key, not any static properties.
TOOO then also addresses the limits that evolution must work within, and how even the simplest of these sets of peptides can become complex and integrated. He shows that order and chaos can be harnessed by evolution in a similar fashion to mutation and sex. He shows these are complementary approaches.
So why hasn't he won your prize ?
As for Logically, God exists and life has meaning, or He doesn't and it does not. There is no in-between for a binary condition., well that's not a binary condition (it's total bollocks as well, but leaving that to one side...)
There are four states for any two binary orthogonal values A and B, they are {A,B}, {A,!B}, {!A,B}, {!A,!B}. The only case your assertion holds is in the degenerate case where A=B (at which point A and B are not orthogonal)
For example, I do not believe in god (so god does not exist, at least for me), but my life has meaning to me.
Simon.
Or Gutenberg (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Works both ways (Score:3, Insightful)
That's bull (Score:2, Insightful)
Much as it would please me to put the blame on ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Back in the 50's and 60's there were research organizations throughout corporate America -- even a number of basic research departments (yes, that's right -- BASIC research, not just APPLIED research).
And corporate America had at least one eye focused on the big picture, making plans beyond the next quarter and being more concerned about the welfare of the company than their bonuses and severance packages.
Over the intervening years, we have seen not only basic, but applied research departments closed down in all but the largest companies. Emphasis has shifted to the current quarter (never mind the next quarter, we'll deal with it next quarter).
All that Dubya can take credit for is using the Religious Right to pummel the weakened science establishment. And the most likely reason he has chosen to attack the scientific establishment is that they ARE weakened and do not represent any sort of political (or other) power in contemporary society. Dubya picks his victims well.
The fault is in our society, and its view of science. Why we belittle the importance of science, and ignore the methodology of the scientific method, I know not, but it is manifested in the declining fraction of college and university science graduates for a much longer time than Dubya has been a factor.
Dubya is more the symptom of the problem than the cause.
Piss of a lunatic christian: (Score:2, Insightful)
Looking through the wrong end of the microscope (Score:2, Insightful)
Remember Luke 4:5-8
" 5The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7So if you worship me, it will all be yours."
8Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.'"
and
John 18:36
" Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."
Giving the Church secular power isn't wrong because it pollutes the secular world. Giving the Church secular power is wrong because it CORRUPTS THE CHURCH. Jesus said so.
The problem in politics is that The so-called "Christian Right" isn't really Christian. They have sold their souls to the devil to pursue political power. That is why they are an embarassment to Jesus, and bring disrespect and contempt on the true Church.
Re:Gold Standard (Score:2, Insightful)
Er, unless the alchemists have made a startingly discovery recently, forging a lump of gold remains pretty difficult.
Re:Wow, you know nothing about India, do you? (Score:0, Insightful)
Now, get back to the SBC call center, my DSL is about to go down.
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:5, Insightful)
"Developing" foreign states become axis of evil material when they have something the U.S. wants or fears (nukes in N Korea) and the puppet governments get uppity and refuse to take their marching orders. For another example, remember Manuel Noriega in Panama. The historical pattern is clear and it is you who need to grow up and realize how you are being manipulated through your morals and ideals. I'm not saying those morals and ideas aren't valid or worth pursuing, just that you're fooling yourself if you think those are the real reasons behind US foreign policy rather than a pretext useful in manufacturing domestic consent.
Re:Gold Standard (Score:3, Insightful)
And with a strong dollar your exports become relatively more expensive in the rest of the World.
America already has problems selling manufactured goods to the rest of the World. Many American brands are almost unknown in Europe and Japan because they are seen as energy inefficient, lacking features, poorly made and not tailored to that market - cars with steering circles the size of Rhode Island, suspension that Isambard Kingdom Brunel would have rejected and fuel economy that makes you wonder if there is a hole in the tank, top loading washing machines, *BIG* CRT televisions - that sort of thing.
The only way America would keep export markets in a strong dollar is by doing the same as the Japanese and Germans did when they were faced with appreciating currencies - invest heavily in quality control and considering local markets rather than thinking what played well in Peoria would also go down a treat in Portsmouth, Potsdam and Pappanaickenpalayam.
Re:You're right (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, the people from Byzantium used the Greek language but were not Greek.
Second, way before Byzantium was finally conquered by the Muslims which founded the Ottoman empire, it was overrun by crusadors and they effectively destroyed the city and its institutions. The Ottomans just finished the job there.
Third, the contacts between Byzantines and Italians that resulted in the Renaissance were the result of the attempts in the later 1400s to rejoin the eastern and western branches of the church. Refugees fleeing to Italy contributed as well, but definitely did not kick it off.
Last but not least, after Byzantium was conquered by the Ottomans, they did take the big Sofia church and changed it into a mosk (one of the most amazing buildings of all time btw, study its architecture if you are interested), but they also did allow the eastern catholic church to remain in Byzantium and were a lot less destructive to the city, its culture and population then the crusadors before them.
The US government never had morals (Score:5, Insightful)
in Chile and here in Brasil the CIA helped stage military coups (74 and 64 respectively) transforming what where democratic republics in bloody, raping/murdering dictatorships.
As Deep Throat once said, "follow the money".
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
I've read a few books about the history of zero, and it's not obvious, and neither can it's origin be traced to any one people. We can probably assume that the author of *an entire book* about the history of zero might have used a few other sources than Google and his own imagination, and will probably have cited them in a bibliography. Even if this is not the case, it's nice to have a reference to another source, and you can always look for other books on the subject if that one does not satisfy you...
* Have a look at the recent wiki editors comments. He removed bits he did not believe were true using another source on the internet as his justification. I'm not saying he's wrong, but still...
"Description - removing portion that is not true. Contradicting source: http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/search.php?MT=%BF%F4%
No government has morals (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Quaint are these arguments pinning all the woes of the Western world on religion, on Christianity. Typically, Christianity is blamed for any and all murders, genocides, etc. I find that systems void of any deity are quite effective at slaughtering people too, thus we had millions killed, murdered, exterminated under fascism/communism (and whatever "ism" Pol Pot ran).
In the Abolition of Man Lewis argues that there has always been a string of truth throughout civilization (citing there is only one civilization). He calls this the Tao and argues that it has always existed and keeps cropping up no matter what in whatever religious form. Kant's paradox points this out as he compares the mystery of the starry heavens to the mystery of the moral law within. We just can't escape it -- this need to do and be right, so, call it what you will, but Christianity is simply another form of it (no one ever said it was perfect).
Lewis goes on to note that, for the first time ever, the Tao is actually under attack and in jeopardy of being done away with -- that this is a unique event in history. This is exactly what happened the last century in Germany, the USSR and Cambodia -- Taoless (The Tao being a general concept of a supernatural force we must answer to) systems took over the minds of humanity (yes, even in Cambodia -- oddly). Now, people died, and, sure, people died under religions too, but the fact remains that, for the first time ever, people were killed, en mass, not for land, not for belief, not for any reason other than the fact that they no longer should exist on the planet. The Jewish Holocaust is the best example of this. It was killing, for the first time ever, with the goal of entirely eliminating a certain people from the planet. Say what you will, but all other wars and conflicts had another, primary, goal.
In short, Christianity may suck, religion may suck, but these have never produced the goal which a Taoless system has produced, nor has ever such a dismal concept been conceived in any religion.
Irreligious systems, Taoless systems (communism, fascism, etc.), surprisingly, have the same goals as religion. They simply don't want a god to be any part of the solution, but this causes the paradox of demanding the function of a heart without having a heart. We simply don't behave very well on our own without the thought that we will, eventually, answer to a higher force. It is the brain that feeds the stomach through the heart. We remove the organ and demand the function.... We castrate and then demand the gelding procreate -- it simply cannot happen. Or, Lewis puts it another way, "what makes a man sit in the trench through the 6th hour of bombardment for God and country?" which he answers, "what else can make a man sit through the 6th hour of bombardment but God and country?" (These quotes from memory). This leads into thought that along with religion comes concepts of country, nationhood, family, etc. One could argue that we are moving beyond these hindrances -- that the American Civil War marked the end of state-centeredness and into nationhood, or that the end of WWII marked the end of nationhood and into a global community. Indeed, perhaps we are moving beyond god, beyond the boundaries of answering to such a force, but without the heart -- without these pesky religions -- it is an ominous world looming wherein there is no great parent up there to whom we must answer, where Nietzsche's ubermensch will create his own world, in his own likeness and the final minorities who don't look like me must be removed as so much infestation.
I empathize with Voltaire who witnessed the horror of a flawed religion, a flawed Christianity. I empathize with Bultmann who attempted to save the embattled faith from itself, but at the end of the day Kant's "moral law within" cannot be escaped, nor can it be supplanted with a godless system based on what's best
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Good point. Its also an illuminating point as to why "No Child Left Behind" is a fatally and intentionally flawed program that is going to eventually cause an educational catastrophe.
This flawed scheme is compelling public schools to MAKE people with low intelligence, low motivation or learning disabilities achieve parity with their peers. In most cases it simply wont happen and isn't happening. After a few more years all the public schools saddled with low achievers will be accused of being failed public schools and their funding gets yanked. The Republicans will decimate the public education system and the teachers unions, and replace them with vouchers, private schools, and especially religious schools that can drill religion in to students every day, without all those bothersome church state separation issues that bug them so much about public schools. The under achievers will be cut adrift at that point because private schools wont take them so chances are a whole bunch of kids will get "Left Behind" by the new system once the Republicans have destroyed public education.
The dirty secret of the Houston school system which was the "model" for no child left behind was they were just encouraging, if not forcing, all the underachievers to drop out and concealing their high drop out rate by marking them as transfers etc. Their test scores looked great but they in fact were leaving vast numbers of children behind as road kill of their twisted scheme.
Re: America has a choice.. (Score:2, Insightful)
mathematical teaching (Score:3, Insightful)
Some of the most recent curriculums like the TIRK methods are actually very good. They encourage the student to be problem solvers and explored multiple ways to solve a mathematical problem.
Something fascinating happened when the teachers were trained in using this method. Many of them realized that THEY THEMSELVES never really understood the math concepts. They just did it by rote. This shows that a simple emphasis on "Rithmetics" doesn't help nurture engineers and scientists.
The problem occurs when the teachers are not trained in how to use the curriculum and don't understand mathematical thinking themselves. As a group, there is the additional problem that most primary school teachers are female and they were never encouraged to become proficient in math in the past.
The whole geek-jock stereotypes is damaging to the educational enterprise. Perhaps we need new cultural role models to create mass interest. Where will the next scientist-hero-celebrity come from?
Re:America has a choice.. (Score:4, Insightful)
If some sort of Intelligent Design were to become a science, it would need to be able to make independently verifiable and falsifiable predictions. The key hypothesis, of course, is that there is some sort of intelligence directing the creation of life on Earth. There would be many different related hypotheses (to use the proper scientific term). One would be that all life was created as it is, which basic biological evolution would rule out, unless someone can conclusively demonstrate that evolution did not produce the initial variety of life, but only functions after that initial creation (there being no life before a creation that can evolve). A second, and stronger one, would be an intelligent hand in the evolution of life. Certain results would be expected that could demonstrate an intelligent hand versus simple non-intelligent evolution. And I am sure if you wrack your brain you could think of some others. But they would need to be testable and falsifiable hypotheses and I personally think it would be an interesting study. This is not, however, what current ID proponents are after. They are simply and brazenly trying to force their absurd fundamentalism on the rest of us.
Re:Gold Standard (Score:3, Insightful)
At a previous job, one of my co-workers was an expatriate from South Vietnam, an RVN officer who managed to escape after the fall of the South. He told me that the primary interest of the USA in Vietnam was oil -- specifically oil discovered off an island claimed by both China and Vietnam.
The USA entered the Vietnam Conflict in full force based upon the utterly false claim that two North Vietnamese patrol boats "attacked" the US 6th Fleet in the Gulf of Tonkin. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and war commenced. That conflict was marked by US military tactics that did not secure territory or borders, and an enemy that melted into a supportive population. The withdrawl of US forces from Vietnam was based upon a hand-over to the "capable US trained and equipped" Vietnamese Army.
The Iraqi War is deja vu, all over again. Once again the USA is embroiled in a conflict involving much needed natural resources, based upon yet more false pretexts of WMD and "direct links" between that government and acts of domestic terrorism. Insufficient numbers of US troops have been deployed in Iraq to secure territory or borders. We are fighting an enemy virtually indistinguishable from the general population, who appear to support them. And yet again, the USA's exit strategy is to turn the much more intense war over to another "US trained and equipped" national army.
In both these conflicts, the USA was afflicted with poor planning, and increasingly disenchanted American public, and loss of respect and stature in the international community. The only groups that benefitted from the Vietnam Conflict are, yet again, the only groups that are benefitting from the Iraqi War -- the defense department's civilian contractors. The loss of American blood and treasure in foreign conflicts was presaged by the warning from President Dwight Eisenhower regarding the USA's "military-industrial complex".
Re:It's not religion that will diminish the US... (Score:3, Insightful)
The US claims to spread democracy, yet holds presidential elections so biased towards two near-identical candidates that the only thing separating them is how effectively they rigged the impossible ballots.
Utter nonsense. Including this with your otherwise excellent points is like accusing someone of being a murderer and then adding "I also heard that he might have smoked pot once." That ballot-rigging stuff is for the sorts of conspiracists who believe that we never landed on the moon, and to those of us who vote here, believe me, our candidates are far from identical.
The US is fighting a war on terror, yet has consistently been the biggest state sponsor of terrorism for decades, and remains the only nation in history ever to have actually used a weapon of mass destruction that cost millions of civilian lives.
Here I only want to take issue with your second point, your little reference to the dropping of a few nukes on Japan. It is an action that has to be considered in context, and it doesn't really have anything to do with the reasons why the USA is the primary bulls-eye for terrorists.
Help me do something about this problem (Score:3, Insightful)
The Pope (Score:1, Insightful)
His religious tenets on birth control in general, and condom use in particular, are indirectly responsible for the slow, painful death of millions of people, as well as the hunger and suffering of millions more.
I think Jesus would have wanted people who already have more children than they can feed, and people in countries ravaged by AIDS, to wear condoms. Although maybe only if they were Jewish, now that I think about it...
I was glad to see him go (*), although his replacement scarcely seems better.
(*) The Pope, not Jesus. I'm not that fucking old!
Trofim Denisovich Lysenko (Score:3, Insightful)
To put it literaly, in Soviet Russia, genetics inherits from you! [pun intended]
Lysenko's theory of genetics was that your environment could alter your genetic constitution so that you could pass acquired traits to your offspring. This was in contrast to the Mendel theory where inherited characteristics were in-born and not affected by environmental change. Stalin loved this idea as it fit with his political agenda of "re-educating" people...
As a result Soviet biology was set back god knows how many years... Perhaps in god-less soviet russia, maybe they didn't care that god didn't even know
Re:Works both ways (Score:2, Insightful)