Thursday, November 11, 2010
Science vs. Imagination (or L vs. S)
To continue our debate... I believe that both are essential. They have different roles; and the debate on which of them is more important, could go on forever. I heard some people saying in class today that science is essential for survival; but it depends on what our definition of survival is. It's unfair to say that imagination is useless, just because it's role is more implicit. People have different wants and needs; so in the end, it depends on the person. Some people need more imagination to survive in this industry, while others need the science - but in the end, everyone needs both. Imagination creates science, and science creates imagination. Otherwise: let's just agree to disagree.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Immagination is innofensive; this criteria is the whole beauty of the concept.
ReplyDeleteEvolution necessits science which makes it undispensable to our lives but it does show some drawbacks. The use of science can be overused and its result can be dangerous. For example, the attomic bomb is one of the most threatning use of science. With our immagination; we can dream, freely with no consequences.
Nevertheless, immagination is crucial to create science and science is sometimes needed to imagine. These two concepts complete each other and there is no such thing as science killing imagination but it can affect it and limit a free mind.
The debate should not be on whether which is more important than the other, it should not put in contrast the "different roles" of science and imagination, in fact it should not even be called "Science vs. Imagination". That is because science and imagination are essentially the same thing. They are not two separate domains, where one provides tools for survival, and the other simply lets you dream. (In fact, since the birth of humanity, humans have seeked to live, not only to survive. The development of culture, a way of life, and traditions, is based on this.) My point is, a dreamer is a scientist, and a scientist is actually a dreamer. For example, one day a man imagined: "what if one day people could fly up to the moon?" And humanity, thanks to science has accomplished that. Even Frankenstein was if anything a person of imagination. He thought: "what if I could reach the power of God and create life?". And then, with the use of science, he did precisely that.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with Romain. Science and imagination complete each other, make each other possible. To create something you have to imagine that something first.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I don't really agree with Barbara when she says that that imagination is inofensive. She says herself that imagination creates science and vice-versa, so to create the atomic bomb, Julius Robert Oppenheimer had to imagine using purified uranium-235 as a weapon. Therefore it is in reality his imagination which killed the people. Science was just a tool in the process.
However we still shouldn't discredit science completely for things that have happened through time, because it were scientific discoveries which allowed for these ideas to be born.
Basically what I am saying is that science and imagination are both absolutely necessary for us to live a somewhat balanced life, but can also form a deadly combination. It is like in anything a question of finding a healthy balance.
PS: happy day after thanksgiving! :D
I love Lea's comment! I guess, lea, it's a matter of good chemistry, right? One of the ideas we are exploring right now is exactly what you are talking about: the danger of imagination and what happens when it goes overboard and proves destructive. I'm not sure that Oppenheimer himself, however, was the dangerous one. He had the imagination and scientific know how, but he wasn't the one that put it to dangerous use, was he? It took others to do that. That's also something to remember--once these monsters are unleashed, they have a mind of their own!
ReplyDelete