[Buddha-l] it's not about belief

[curt]

Science is when new things are discovered about the physical world that 
weren't known before - technology is when those new discoveries are 
applied to making weapons. Well, its not always weapons - but usually 
its weapons. Weapons or video games. Anyway - the people who "apply" the 
science are always trying to improve the application. The ambitious ones 
are trying to find ways to make everything better (more deadly), while 
the lazy ones are trying to find ways to make things easier (without 
decreasing the killing power). Its not clear when a "technological 
improvement" counts as a "scientific discovery". Also, scientific 
"progress" tends to come in very small increments - which can often be 
safely anticipated ahead of time - in which case scientists are doing 
little more than making "improvements on existing technology". There is 
in fact no bright line separating technology from science - but the two 
always go together.

Of course people who embrace science with religious fervor (like Mary 
Baker Eddy and Richard Dawkins) require dogmatic definitions of what 
science "is". That's because they are still trapped inside the world 
view of what the Emperor Julian called the "creed-making fishermen".

- Curt

Richard P. Hayes wrote:

>On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 14:52 -0500, curt wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I'm surprised that no one has brought up metallurgy yet 
>>    
>>
>
>Perhaps it is because we were talking about science, not technology.
>Metallurgy in ancient times was technology, but hardly anything like
>science as we now use the term. 
>
>One of my own personal heroines is Ursula Franklin, whom I first knew
>through her pacifistic work. (She's a Quaker, and at one time so was I.)
>She wrote extensively of metallurgy in China, also in subarctic America
>and South America. For reasons known best to herself she wrote of
>ancient metallurgy as part of the history of technology, not as part of
>the history of science. Having got her PhD in physics, I reckon she may
>have had some idea of the distinction between science and technology. In
>fact, I know she did, since I heard her magnificent Massey lectures on
>CBC radio, which were eventually published as a very readable book
>entitled The Real World of Technology. I recommend it.
>
>Thank you for mentioning the ancient technological art of metallurgy, Dr
>Steinmetz. It indirectly brought to mind fond memories of an old friend.
>
>  
>