SCIENCE VERSUS INDUSTRY: Part Three: In search of the scientific self-consciousness





“An emerging, better society cannot be born and cannot function without its own scientific self-consciousness”

“Man is, by his nature, incapable not only of comparing facts and deducing some consequences from them, but even simply of observing them carefully and remembering them reliably, if he does not immediately connect them with some explanation.”

“…science leads to foresight, and foresight allows us to regulate action.”

— August Comte


These observations by August Comte now point us toward the first battlefield of the revolution that needs to come.

Every day, in our global culture, science provides its insights and foresights into what can, could, should and must be done. Nevertheless, the, on the one hand, regulatory and on the other hand inventive and creative action that should be stimulated by scientific foresight is either slow to come about or never eventuates at all. This is because, between the thought and the act resides the market. Before any technological answer to our problems can be put into effect it must first prove itself to be the most profitable option. If there is more money to be made in milking the old technologies the market place will do so. If the final eradication of a disease threatens a profit-making industry, then the final cure will be repressed.

In this way, an untamed science becomes the enemy of industry and industry becomes the great enemy of humanity.

From industry’s point-of-view, scientific forecasts and data very often demand increased regulations which means more expenditure, the prohibition of certain uses in manufacturing, or even the prohibition of certain very profitable products (lead in petrol, many unhealthy food additives, or additives in consumer items that cause addiction are some examples of science tampering with the freedom of the market-place).

The last century has been dominated by a war between industry and science in the form of corporate and industrial censorship, manipulation and counter-sciences (bogus scientific reports paid for by industry to debunk authentically objective scientific reports). What has been so ardently proclaimed as the great age of technological advancement, has also been the great age of anti-science.

The Catholic church’s persecution of Galileo for his scientific heresies is very easily matched by the attempts to debunk theories of global climate-change. And the results of industry’s persecution of science in this technological age will be far more tragic than the church in the Renaissance.

Likewise, the military-theological society that created the first atom bomb, preferred to remain deaf to the foresight of physicist’s like Einstein that developed the theories that allowed atomic fusion to happen in the first place.

With these two examples alone, we can get an impression of the extent of anti-scientific foresight and criminality that the last hundred years has been capable of.

The dystopia toward which our society seems to be running is not the fault of science, but rather it has come about through the disregard of scientific foresight, carried out by the self-interested power of the industrialists and militarists.

Comte saw a need for a new kind of scientist: generalist rather than specialist, capable of working in all the main branches of scientific knowledge, but equally the social sciences, in order to harmonise all knowledge, form knowledge into a unified system, connecting all the elements of the new system together, and developing them into a position where it could play a leading moral role.

For the necessary change to come about, for the imminent revolution needed to change the suicide-direction that humanity is running along, a scientific self-consciousness must triumph over industry; and it must happen now!



6 thoughts on “SCIENCE VERSUS INDUSTRY: Part Three: In search of the scientific self-consciousness

  1. so …….

    what does this tell us ?

    that literature … theater and art
    have been around for countless centuries

    because there was always interest in reading
    entertainment and having objects of art

    but there has never any thing been
    going toward any sapient society

    and only this will save any homo sapiens
    so … what do we need ?

    maybe ? a forum >
    where every one can bring in any idea
    to helping us save this world …….

    I have a domain for it

    but what for ?
    if there is no interest …

    I do not need such a forum …
    to be talking to myself

    so … it seems to me >

    that I am the only one
    interested in having any intelligent society

    where any and all destruction is impossible >
    because every one wants creation to be

    • If you want your forum to work, it might be a better idea to set it up in one of the Internet forum servers. This is not the best space for forums … blogs can create some debate but that is not their essential purpose. If you are serious about the debates, I think you should try and create symposiums locally. Think of good topics and invite people to speak at them. Contact people through social networking etc.. There are lots of people trying to save the planet so it shouldn’t be hard to get debate and action groups running. But of course it requires time and energy from the organisers. You will need to find places to hold the debates if you want to branch out from the Internet into the physical sphere of symposiums. But first of all, you need to start and get your forum going. I haven’t used Internet forums for over twenty years. Blogging is a more interesting platform for me.

      • thank you paul > but this is no help ….

        we are having 27 top domains in operation > hundreds of sub domains
        and millions of > short
        and we have not found

        one native homo sapiens !

        I have no idea how this planet could be saved
        because all those billions are abvious slaves to their group
        and all those groups are slaves to this worlds paradigm

        do you know about robin dunbar oxford university ?
        having found out through social science studies >>>

        that there are about 50 million criminal organizations
        on this planet earth > having on average of 150 members ….
        between a few and thousands ….

        so how would any one be able to save their world ?
        if he is a member of an organized crime ?

        and should he not help this organized crime
        then he will be with out an existence


  2. Yes, I understand the objective. But please make your comments relate to the specific posts they accompany, otherwise the meaning gets very jumbled.

  3. .
    see what I mean ?

    there is no interest it all !
    just to keeping on the destruction ….

    until this billion pest is xxx

    • .

      to be talking to these ….
      is like talking to a working ant >
      who just has this job to do >

      getting all the eggs from their queen
      cared for >>> to have all this mass of ants
      to infest you home !

      and never listen to any of your arguments
      to just get the hell out off your home
      and doing some good
      making a better soil

      so what is the only thing to do ?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s