TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Science leads to death.

Objective science is not able to penetrate into the domain called life because it denies the validity of the subjective domain which contains the essential elements of life. Life is defined by the presence of conscious feeling in a body. Denying subjective feelings leads to numbness. When numbness has become total one is a corps, dead!

Scientific knowledge is objective knowledge and is only applicable to machine technology. It has nothing to offer in the quest for more life other than to kill it while make it more machine like claiming it to be life.

Humans have become convinced that they are human resources, a commodity at the service of capital. People now speak of their bodies in terms of being fantastic machines. Disease is no longer dis-ease or dis-comfort it is a diagnostic description used to amplify a patience's fear and dependence so as to lock in more income for the practitioner. Robotics and medical prosthesis' are actually blending sentient beings with machines. These humans are not victims. The self hatred of subjective denial has created their situations of need and the objectivity of the machine is there to serve.

Cultures with the most science have become the most insensitive to feeling because of the objective paradigms they hold. Thus they have killed, injured, maimed and tortured more people than one can imagine through declared and undeclared warfare with in the last hundred years. Millions upon millions. They now use drone machines to do their killing and intimidation and some how think it is not them pulling the trigger.

This is the result of humans following a consciously designed path of scientific objectivity which by its very nature is intended to desensitize and annihilate the subjective aspect of human consciousness. .

The followers of scientific objectivity are doomed to die from it as they drive feeling from the body. Steven Hawkins is a prime example of scientific objectivity carried to an extreme. Machines keep him alive.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jul 30 2012: I'm glad my questions have been beneficial. The best conversations edify both parties. To further expound upon the objectivity of science and why it is a necessity, it is noteworthy to mention that in some cases a scientist's personal beliefs may interfere with the actual observation.

    For example: Consider that two scientist, one a strict evolutionist the other a strict creationist. They both observe a fossil. The evolutionist claims, "Oh wait great evidence for evolution", the creationist claims, "Oh what great evidence for creation". Now in reality they both observed a chicken bone covered in cement. This is a very very extreme case. I just used an exaggerated example to demonstrate the problems of using subjectivity. People tend to see what they want to see, not what is really there. That is why science must be objective.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.