I believe that science is for living, are you agree with me?
Yes, the life has high value, and the science takes value when it serves or helps to the life.
Yes, the life has high value, and the science takes value when it serves or helps to the life.
I do agree with your statement dear @Mariano. Science brings many good things to humans and helps every days life.
Life-Changing Science Discoveries are attached. I have brought my answer from another thread which is related to yours.
The inventions of great scientists like Tesla, Einstein, Pasteur, Fleming and many other great scientists have affected people's life in a positive manner. Today's life is much easier thanking to these scientists.
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0932440.html
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_development_of_science_affects_peoples_lives_better_or_worse
I believe that is Science for living, because I don't think that someone lives for a specific thing (I know that Science is not specific, but I mean just for studying). Science is beautiful!
Dear All,
As I have put it earlier the science’ task should be to support the life. Not the life of a slave but the life of free, ethical and diligent people.
Indeed science is to solve problems and make life better and easier in terms of challenges, but we also live to create scientific theories and procedures to solve problems or just to augment theoretical knowledge of science and applications. They are reversibly connected and needed for a purpose.
We use modern science for our happy and comfortable living. But I don't think that science is merely for our living. The development of science is mainly because of the efforts of numerous scientists who have dedicated their whole life to science and scientific researches.
Science should be betterment of the life --- and is also! Further, scientists devote whole life for good research, innovation, discoveries and inventions.
I agree with Dr Subhash C. Kundu.
Science and technology (applied science) has been facilitating life; however, scientists, doctors, engineers, other professionals and researchers devote their whole life to their profession.
Best Regards.
The qualities of a prudent, persistant, well-organized person, like a scientist-professor — somewhat obsessive and not at all carefree are the qualities that help lead to a long life.
http://time.com/81573/how-to-live-longer/
Krishnan, it is a revelation of God father (to Israel and Moses in the mount Horeb) that who honours to your father and to your mother will be happy and will have long life.
some persons devote their whole life for science for making life comfortable for others..so someone has to take the torch...and its a matter of interest which path you want to choose....
Science facilitates comfortable living and prolongs healthy living. In many developing nations, scientific career is for living for persons coming from poor families.
This man was devoted to science while his scientific discoveries has improved the life of humans. The 10 Inventions of Nikola Tesla That Changed The World!
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/10-inventions-of-nikola-tesla-that.html
"Life for the science" is not a fair sacrifice from bioethics perspective, and I mean all kind of harmful experiments on humans.
The life is a present of God, and the human science helps to maintain it. The life for the science remembers to the Indian mouses for experimentation. When the science aids it is correct, but when the science destroys, for example, a life, then the so called science is a perversion of the true science to the service and the well of persons.
There are Religious Sciences also for Catholic and scientist people. My department is an example of it.
Life today divides into the fast track or the slow track. Both are less agreeable than the broad track of yesteryear. For many the slow track means economic insecurity: low earnings, low social standing, anxiety about unemployment, and missing out on the increasing material delights enjoyed by those on the fast track. But the fast track is not without its hazards. For many it means a single-minded obsession with getting ahead, total commitment to the job at the expense of personal relationships, and a frenzied lifestyle where work takes precedence over everything else.
http://zepho.com/rails/books/LivingThe80-20WayWorkLessWorryLessSucceedMoreEnjoyMore.pdf
Science and technology changes life, life itself promotes the development of science and technology, either.
Logically derived from confirmable evidence, evolution is understood to be the result of
an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection. As the
foundation of modern biology, its indispensable role has been further strengthened by the
capacity to study DNA.
http://creationism.org.pl/groups/ptkrmember/szkola/2005/nobel_letter.pdf
Dear @Josephine,it is about how scientists make use of and evaluate the scientific networking platform ResearchGate! I have done your questionnaire. Wish You success in research dear Josephine Schmitt and Philipp Müller! :)
I have left my e-mail in order to get feedback about research outputs.
Josephine and Ljubomir, please do not make comments out of the question.
I think "quality of life" has been badly used in the society. For example when a human life does not have value for anyone due to his/her bad quality of life. In such a way, for someones, if there is not quality of life, such life has not value and the euthanasia would be a possibility.
But this is an egoistic and sinner vision.
Roland, I think in the health sciences and I am not according with you. Raising problems is not more important for the man than solving problems. A honest scientist works for solving problems, not for creating them.
Mario Vincenzo, thank you for your appreciations, but the wrong exists in the world. See an example:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_think_that_the_cases_of_distribution_of_virus_from_time_to_time_are_due_to_illegal_or_unethical_programs
My opinion is science for living. Because the science is used to provide necessities of easy life and convenient to make it more comfortable.
Yes, of course, science is for living, science is for better living. Scientifically rethink the public health, good story follows!
Looks like public health isn't good enough anymore. A new report from a commission headed by the Rockefeller Foundation and the medical journal The Lancet says that we need a new way to look at human health--one that takes the environment into account.
The new field, called planetary health, looks at the intersection between the natural world and humans. Often, that intersection is a head on collision that ends badly for both parties. The commission's report goes beyond a similar report issued by The Lancet last month which looked at the effect climate change had on public health. Instead of just looking at climate, this new, interdisciplinary area of study focuses on all the ways that humans interact with their environment.
http://www.popsci.com/saving-planet-could-save-your-life
http://www.thelancet.com/commissions/planetary-health
In other words, today's life without science and its inventions applied, would be unimaginable! For example, we could not know each other, right?
It is well said that:
Math and Science are life blood of future
http://www.quotehd.com/quotes/bob-becker-quote-math-and-science-are-the-life-blood-of-the-future
The crucial role of a comprehensive education for science at all levels for the general progress of mankind, for economic development, for political maturity, and for worldwide stability is widely recognized — no education, no progress, no development, no maturity, no stability.
Alfred Nobel was one of the first convinced believers in “Science, for the Benefit of Mankind” by bequeathing his tremendous fortune to honor scientific achievements for their benefit on mankind.
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-540-77968-1_1
Dear @Barbara, please give full translation of this part as I can not follow it : "Science requires freedom zewnętrznospołecznej guaranteed by law. Science can only grow in an atmosphere of freedom wewnętrznomoralnej scholar." Thanks.
“The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.”
― Isaac Asimov
A social construct is ontologically subjective, but epistemologically objective. It is ontologically subjective in that the construction and continued existence of social constructs are contingent on social groups and their collective agreement, imposition, and acceptance of such constructions
http://anthropology.net/2008/10/01/race-as-a-social-construct/
"Science for living" is human, the "life for the science" could be the case for some other irrational animals and plants.
Average age of human being has increased like any thing. It is because of science.
Science is a way of work, and the work is for living. So, science is for living.
From its very beginning science has served the humanity and will continue to do so until the needs of human being are fulfilled. History is rich of many scientists who have contributed to different fields of science free of politics, religion, cast, and region. Every human being must have the right to use science and technology for beneficial purposes.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2251729414000044
Think is science for life & then trigger the loop back. Reason being science transforms and touches life. Hence, creating the interest & more dedication from life to scientific research & discovery. Hope this loop back is spiral up & growing bigger for the betterment of human mankind.
If science can't serve the life and humanity; is of no use and can't survive!
I think that the most part of science is unuseful for helping humanity. But some few discoveries give reputation to the science. Human sciences as religion, education, law, psychology, medicine, etc. will aid to the men always.
The science is for the man (and his life), not the man for his science. Science is an instrument for the man, and the man has other interests more important, as his spiritual life or his own life. Science should be at the service of the man. A science which is not at the service of the man is or could be an unuseful thing.
Yes, Dear Mario,
"....science was/is used to improve the quality of life of all beings"! Provided it is used positively.
Wisdom and science are for better life of the men. Both save to the man.
Wisdom is for all the life and the salvation, and the science saves opportunity the life in this world.
In Science for Life acclaimed science writer Brian Clegg cuts through the vested interests and confusing contradictory statements that litter the media and the internet, to give a clear picture of what science is telling us right now about changing our lives for the better.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Life-Manual-Better-Living/dp/1848318189
The work is for the family, not the family for the work. Science is a form of work. Family is a form of life.
Life and science can be harmonized, the life in the first place, the science as a help to the life. They can walk in unity.
Jesus said: "I am the way, the truth and the life". And science is part of our way.
How many scientists would they be scientists after if they have solved economically his future? I think few of them.
If the science is a form of work, the work is for living, not the life for working. This is an old teaching.
But the human spirit can do survive the science even without compensation in form of economic benefits. For love to the truth and the service to other men/women.
It was me who accidentally downvoted your answer dear @Manuel. Fingers! Yes, I do accept, science is what we make of it. Furthermore, not only scientists and researchers do have a role in, but society and its needs also. Do not forget relation between science and technology, science and education....
Science in the life can do survive this. Without science the life is very exposed to great risks.
It exists life with science, but is there science without life? We can not know a universe without life in ourselves.
Before aparition of the man in the world, was the science as we know today? Securely yes, but the man did not know this because he did not exist.
No body takes birth for science; rather develop science for better living.
Yes, dear Subhash, many children take birth thanks to the science, for example with transfussions of blood. Otherwise much of them would not survive.
Science Supports Spirituality for Healthy Living!
"For decades science has supported that there are health benefits of religion and spirituality. For example, those who are religious/spiritual tend to have "fewer sexual patterns and practice safe sex, exercise more, eat better, not smoke cigarettes, drink less alcohol, and avoid illegal drugs; and they are at lower risk of both murder and suicide." Moreover, research suggests that religion and spirituality are positively correlated with better mental and physical health functioning..."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-pessin/integrating-complementary_b_8343210.html
A study of the MIT proved that being sincere and transmitting beliefs make more realized men in their lifes. Also it indicates that such men gain about 8-9% more than those who do not communicate their beliefs.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Life Sciences