Quote from: CoinCube on October 05, 2017, 02:48:45 AM

Quote from: Astargath on October 04, 2017, 09:23:25 PM

I will stick to science. So far it seems like there is indeed no purpose but who knows, religious people are desperate in trying to find meaning, heaven would still be pointless and will still have no purpose. When you are in heaven, what's your purpose? My assumption is not purely based on faith, it is based on evidence and I agree that science still has a lot more to do.

Science is great. I have nothing against science. However, you should know that without higher meaning and purpose science itself becomes corrupt over time and and ultimately dies.

Here are some excerpts from a book on this topic that drives this point home.

Not even trying: the corruption of real science
http://corruption-of-science.blogspot.com/2013/07/not-even-trying-corruption-of-real.html?m=1

Quote from: Bruce Charlton

Briefly, the argument of this book is that real science is dead, and the main reason is that professional researchers are not even trying to seek the truth and speak the truth; and the reason for this is that professional scientists no longer believe in the truth - no longer believe that there is an eternal unchanging reality beyond human wishes and organization which they have a duty to seek and proclaim to the best of their (naturally limited) abilities. Hence the vast structures of personnel and resources that constitute modern science are not real science but instead merely a professional research bureaucracy, thus fake or pseudo-science; regulated by peer review (that is, committee opinion) rather than the search-for and service-to reality...

A few decades ago one could assume that published work was honest and competent (except in specific cases); now one must assume that published work is dishonest and incompetent (except in specific cases).
A few decades ago one could assume that high status (successful) scientists were honest and competent (except in specific cases); now one must assume that famous and powerful scientists are dishonest and incompetent (except in specific cases).
*
Overall it seems that things have gone backwards, and not just slightly.
Yet research activity (personnel, funding, publishing, communicating) have all increased exponentially doubling in volume every 15 or so years (doubling every decade in medical research. And China has exploded with research activity in the past 10 years).
So there has been massive expansion of inputs with first stagnation then decline of outputs. Something has gone terribly wrong: not just slightly wrong, but terribly wrong.
...
How did we get from useful and real science to useless research bureaucracies generating hype and spin for the public relations industry?
Anyone who has been a scientist for more than 20 years will realize that there has been a progressive, significant and indeed qualitative decline in the honesty of communications between scientists, between scientists and their employing institutions, and between scientists and their institutions and the outside world.
In a nutshell science has gone from being basically honest to basically dishonest (and in the process gone from being real science to professional research).
...
Scientists are usually too cautious and timid to risk telling outright lies about important things, or to invent and emphasize fake data; but instead they push the envelope of exaggeration, selectivity and distortion as far as possible. And tolerance for this kind of untruthfulness has greatly increased over recent years.
So it is now routine, normal, indeed required behaviour for scientists deliberately to exaggerate, to hype the significance of their status and performance, and spin the importance of their research.
...

Furthermore, it is entirely normal and unremarkable for ordinary scientists to spend their entire professional life doing work they know in their hearts to be trivial or bogus preferring that which promotes their career over that which has the best chance of advancing science.
...
Indeed, senior scientists in the best places are clever, hard-working and intelligent enough rapidly to become expert at hyping mundane research to create a misleading impression of revolutionary importance. Far from resisting, or fighting, the degradation of science; the senior researchers at the best places have led (indeed driven) their subordinates into a morass of corruption..
It is a kind of Greshams Law at work; when dishonest research is treated as if it were real science; then bad research drives out the good.

Quit quoting stuff, do you not have an opinion?

''However, you should know that without higher meaning and purpose science itself becomes corrupt over time and and ultimately dies. '' Bullshit. First of all, no one knows if there is a higher meaning or purpose, as I said, heaven would still have no meaning or purpose. We are where we are thanks to science and a few very smart people. Religion doesn't help, it's useless.