Science is a process or social activity to know how nature does work. It is also ever revising processes whereby theories are generated revised or rejected based on new evidence. Therefore, in my view use of phrase "Proven Science Paradigm" is not correct, because the term "Paradigm" by Kuhn in 1966 was used with "Shift". Therefore paradigms change over time.

It is true that that science is overemphasized. So much so it has taken status of religion generally referred as "Scientism". That is, no knowledge possible beyond science (physical sciences).

However, technology is based on science or applied science made possible by application of scientific concept through engineering is technology.

Due to progress of the western world based on science made less developed countries to places emphasis on science and technology.

It is true application of science brought great benefits to the West and some to the East, but its consequences are devastating and we all now experiencing.

Science is a process or social activity to know how nature does work. It is also ever revising processes whereby theories are generated revised or rejected based on new evidence. Therefore, in my view use of phrase "Proven Science Paradigm" is not correct, because the term "Paradigm" by Kuhn in 1966 was used with "Shift". Therefore paradigms change over time.

It is true that that science is overemphasized. So much so it has taken status of religion generally referred as "Scientism". That is, no knowledge possible beyond science (physical sciences).

However, technology is based on science or applied science made possible by application of scientific concept through engineering is technology.

Due to progress of the western world based on science made less developed countries to places emphasis on science and technology.

It is true application of science brought great benefits to the West and some to the East, but its consequences are devastating and we all now experiencing.

That's a good question

I am an engineer but became interested in this discussion

Both of you are right approximately

Today, science is not used properly

And the place of science in human progress is gone

And richest men and politicians have abusived that .

I think science should be accompanied by faith.

At that time Progress and excellence take place

Sorry if I came into the your discussions

The meaning of 'Paradigm' (Παράδειγμα in greek) is that of the central view for each time period: if you go back in the Middle Ages you will observe that Religion was everything in the Western world. Now Science is all and some people argue that the Holy Inquisition of past years has been replaced from the peer review process.

The Technology is different from Pure Science, but all of its applications have the legitimacy of a proper scientific theory behind.

The central question is this: If we agree that Holy Inquisition failed to make better human life in Middle Ages what guarantees that Science will succeed today?

I cant use the word "overhauled" because it gives impression of a massive improvement abruptly. To me the science is much improved today as compared to the past. Scientific processes are much more illustrated, scientific collaborations have been increased, number of patents have also been tremendously increased. All such indicators have helped the human life to get better as they have led us to introduce new techniques, new drugs, new equipment etc; though sometimes negative use of science makes human life difficult such as Cyber Crimes, biological and chemical war weapons etc.

For me it is relative but may not be overvalued. The progress of science and technology today is relative with time. And for sure it will have a shift in the future because that is what is law of nature dictates (ex. entropy). So there will be more studies, more journals, more universities (or one universities offering varied disciplines or one discipline with more branches, etc. ). It is not overvalued but it is what it takes with time.

As to the other question, did science helps make our life better at present? I think so and I will not elaborate the details here. However, we know that there is always the negative side or the bane of these things which we can argue as the result of our scientific pursuit. For me, whether there is science/technology or not, there will always be this sort of bane things that will surface..which is natural. That is why science is there to help us explain and cope with this change.

What do we consider to be Science? It may look like we have proliferation of "Science" related "things", but I think this has been fueled by the so called knowledge economy which has allowed the emergence of many fora for exchanging knowledge and creating the impression that there is so much "Science" available. Even this forum we are engaging in is helping us argue and in the process leading us to engage, critically reevaluating our positions. We can not rule out that in order to look and sound trendy we sometimes embrace Scientism without really knowing exactly what it is we are disputing and arguing about. Science can not be overvalued ... I think if it is Science, it should be able to stand up and later on when we apply it in real world applications it is transformed into technology.

No, but a lot of other things are undervalued. Science only works when trying to understand the physical world.

The definition of what is 'science' is blurred and its confusion with 'technology' is a disaster the word 'technoscience' is horrible and has no meaning, science and technique deeply interact but they are not the same thing, sometimes technques comes before (The Wright brothers wer able to fly with an engine powered machine when theoretical physicist were able to demosnstrate you this was impossible) the Maxwell equations came much time before TV sets...the same person can work in both fields but the attitude is different.

Too much money , too much people involved, the role of 'fons juris' (where the 'right defintive answers come') ruined science that progressively lose its role just because was 'overvalued' (thus now is full of false statements, see the attached paper).

But there is hope, and the hope is in the fact a lot of people are understanding we need a fresh new start and that we do not need much money to do it (in many cases a PC ios more than sufficient).

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Science is a magnificent tool for explaining and understanding the physical universe, but it is limited to that. It is hardly undervalued in a world where some parents STILL believe that autism is caused by vaccines and people are taken in every day by quack cures, homeopathy and non-evidence-based medicine.  However, science cannot take the place of faith and the spiritual realm.  It's a magnificent tool, but it's just a tool.  Science can't measure faith because it resides in a non-physical realm.  However, it's just as real.

We are experiencing big problems in reproducibility, this is becoming a big treat to science, especially in the light of ever increasing data mining enterprises that will be probably a case of 'garbage-in' 'garbage out', see the following:

http://www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-1.17552