[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 102 KB, 641x600, 641px-mad_scientist_transparent_backgroundsvg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3817557 No.3817557 [Reply] [Original]

What science branch do you think will be the most useful for humanity in the future?

>> No.3817573

Quantum mechanics combined with Nuclear fusion.

Infinite energy and super computers are a good mix.

>> No.3817578

Biology and Nanotechnology

>> No.3817591

>>3817573
>>3817578
Pretty much these four

>> No.3817641

Women's studies

>> No.3817667

number theory/cryptology

>> No.3817672

Biochemistry and Plant Biology/Genetics. People gotta eat.

>> No.3817687

>>3817641
That shouldn't even be a thing.

>> No.3817710

I would suggest the Life Sciences with the incorporation of human geographical epistemologies.

Cause let's not kid ourselves, none of the shit we do today could be done without success and dominance of urbanisation.

>> No.3817713

Philosophy and Theology

>> No.3817721

>>3817710
You I don't get

>>3817713
...and I really hope you are trolling.

>> No.3817732
File: 73 KB, 468x668, Aristotle_Plato.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3817732

>>3817721
Without philosophy and theology.
What will you have us do with technology?

Who should get the access to the technology?
Everyone? Only the rich? Only the "smart"? How would you define smart?

Should we help the less fortunate by providing them medicine? Should we let them die?

Why are we here? Is our purpose only to recreate? Is there some objective purpose to our lives? Our we in control of our own bodies? Should we create Artificial Intelligence?

Should we attain immortality?

Is it okay to create life?

Is it okay to kill animals and rainforests to build our factories?

Without Philosophy and Theology, all you're left with is anarcho-capitalism.

Technology expanding for no reason. Earth dying for no reason. People suffering for no reason.

So no sir, I ain't trolling.

>> No.3817735

>>3817732
I can see why you might consider philosophy like that, but theology, just no. The sooner we ditch religion the better.

>> No.3817744

>>3817732
>>3817732

We already know there aren't absolute answers to most of those questions ...

and those that are worth answering are already answered ..

also .. fuck you .. 3/10

>> No.3817746

>>3817732
Shut up, retard.
That's nice topics for high school essays.
Humanities - not science.

>> No.3817751

>>3817732
> philosophy

okay, you may have a point, but it will not be the *most" useful

> theology

...

>> No.3817754

>>3817735
Yeah I suppose I agree with you somewhat with theology.

However not all religions are anti-science like evangelicals would have you believe.

Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, and Confucianism traditionally encouraged exploration into nature. They both helped at times and hindered at times scientific advancement.

>> No.3817763

>>3817754
We shouldn't need anything from religion. it may have been beneficial in the past but we need to intellectually outgrow it.

>> No.3817766

Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. - The Buddha

Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. - The Buddha

>> No.3817773

I see Buddhism a lot like many other ancient practices - back then, a very good thing, but should not be needed nowadays or in the future.

>> No.3817778

medicine

>> No.3817781

computer science for sure

>> No.3817785

>>3817766
Don't believe anything just because that one guy said it. -Me.
Don't believe the sentence above either. -Me.

>> No.3817786

Neuroscience / biology / mind uploading

Reducing our dependence on our own biology would be a massive step forward on the same magnitude as the development of language.

>> No.3817790

Still going to be the sciences behind the advancement of computers and energy production for a long time OP.

When we have reached a sufficient level of automation space travel will become truly viable and the sciences related to that will join the ranks of most useful.

To try to identify a singular science as 'most useful' is the pinnacle of frivolousness.

>> No.3817792

>>3817746
Science came from,
Empiricism which came from,
Epistemology which is an important field in,
Philosophy

The first sciences were philosophers.
Science was philosophy from B.C. to 1600s A.D.
Natural Philosophy
----
Thales
Anaximander
Anaximenes
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Western societies first scientists.
Issac Newton and Rene Descartes all wrote and thought highly about their contributions to the sciences.

>> No.3817795
File: 7 KB, 260x147, 3464575869.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3817795

>>3817735

You got it all wrong man. Go check out "The Quantum Activist"

>A genuine paradigm shift. While mainstream science remains materialist, a substantial number of scientists are supporting and developing a paradigm based on the primacy of consciousness.

>Dr. Amit Goswami, Ph.D, a pioneer of this revolutionary new perspective within science shares with us his vision of the unlimited potential of consciousness as the ground of all being, and how this revelation can actually help us to live better.

>The Quantum Activist tells the story of a man who challenges us to rethink our very notions of existence and reality, with a force and scope not felt since Einstein.

>This film bridges the gap between God and Science. The work of Goswami, with stunning precision and without straying from the rigors of quantum mechanics, reveals the overarching unity inherent in the worlds major religions and mystical traditions.

We don't need to ditch religion or spirituality if you will, but we do need to abolish the notion that science and spirituality can't work hand in hand.

>> No.3817801

>>3817792
> came from

so? doesn't imply continued usefulness. chemistry came from alchemy, is alchemy relevant to modern medical science?

>> No.3817802

Sorry guys,
I just wonder sometimes about whats more important.
Studying the computer in front of me, or what to do with it.

>> No.3817808

>>3817732

Every single one of those questions will be answered with "is there economic incentive to do so?", there is literally nothing to ponder.

>> No.3817818

I'm disappointed, /sci/. After all these years, you still keep falling for the philosophy trolls.

I'm going for fusion and nanotech. Fusion, because energy. Nano, because it's my field.

>> No.3817820

>>3817808
Which is what I said,
Anarcho-capitalism.

We might as well abolish the welfare state and let Bill Gates run the country.

>> No.3817826

>>3817808

But all you have done is change the phrasing of the question.
That doesn't give an answer and there are still pro vs. cons to consider.

>> No.3817827

>>3817820
Unfortunately this will continue to be the case for thousands of years.

>> No.3817885

>>3817795
>but we do need to abolish the notion that science and spirituality can't work hand in hand.

Spirituality and religion are two completely separate yet easy to confuse concepts.

>> No.3817894

>>3817885
Not the guy you're replying to but...
My original argument was for Philosophy and "Theology" being important. Not religion per say.

>> No.3818440

Communications and media studies

>> No.3818477

>>3817578
I think he's right.

The ability to alter (either with nanomachines, viruses, or by germ-line engineering) organisms to our desires/uses is extremely useful. Synthetic biology is only just getting started, the things we could accomplish are astonishing.

It's a well known fact that biologically-derived products are much cheaper (in terms of cost to consumers, production costs, labor costs, etc.) than chemically synthesized products. The proliferation of labor-saving and resource-saving biotechnologies will be, in my opinion, the next great economic revolution. Just as per capita productivity rose with the computer, so will biotech recycling/processing/synthesis/etc. enable nations to grow their economies without expanding labor pools or buying up massive amounts of raw materials.

>> No.3818502

Any and all fields/branches that lead to dealing with the retarded and trash who refuse to work.