Science without humanities would lead to further war. Explain with examples in detail.?

answers1: Science without humanities would lead to further war.
Explain with examples in detail.? <br>
<br>
~~~ Science works in 'labs', studies stuff, makes hypotheses and tests
them... No one gets killed except in an accident! True science is
apolitical, and has no beliefs to defend and propagate! <br>
War and most other human 'atrocities' are the result of 'beliefs'
(religion), not science! The 'true believers' use the findings of
science to their advantage against the
heathen/unbelievers/Communists/whoever believes differently...
answers2: This is demonstrably fallacious as a non sequitur and/or as
affirming the consequent. <br>
<br>
Science is an epistemological method and war is the result of human
behavior. <br>
<br>
As an epistemological method science does not in any way directly
apply to war categorically speaking. <br>
<br>
Rather that as a result of human behavior science(or more accurately
technologies resulting in the application of science) is used to
develop tools that can come to be exploited for use in warfare. <br>
<br>
However the suggestion that science, without humanities would lead to
further war is not logically consistent considering that science is
defined as an epistemological methodology. <br>
As such science is within the category of humanities as it relates to
a particular branch of philosophy, most notably epistemology. <br>
<br>
Though I do not think this was the intent of the assignment. <br>
<br>
I believe it is your task to reiterate what is already common
knowledge, that being that other branches of philosophy, politics and
ethics, offers a pragmatic means to avoid violent conflict that are
result of human nature. <br>
That is to say that politics and ethics can find solutions to problems
without reverting to the violence of outright combat, but it should
not be suggested that this is always going to be the case. <br>
For example if the agenda of one nation is to violently occupy another
nation, then it seems reasonable that the nation that is the target
for occupation has an imperative to combat an invasion with what
violence is necessary to prevent its culture from being destroyed or
conquered by the oppressive or genocidal agenda of an invading
aggressive nations military. <br>
<br>
<br>
For this reason it seems like a B.S. assignment to me. <br>
<br>
Just saying.
answers3: you look to be assuming that technology can not clarify each
little thing. If some thing is going to, it really is going to be
technology. technology is the in ordinary words device we ought to
assist attempt to observe, and then clarify some thing contained in
the universe from a human perspective. "The medical technique refers
to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, procuring new
knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge."
technology's intelligence is in ordinary words constrained by
technique of human intelligence. Human intelligence is constrained if
a secret of the universe is going unresolved. From a human element of
view, no, technology is the whole "genius". it is the alternative of
each and each of the thoughts human beings have received about the
universe, and it is going to stay the whole "genius" as long as human
beings exist. each little thing we've discovered about how the
universe works has been placed into technology, and that wide volume
of thoughts will in ordinary words proceed to advance as our species a
at the same time as.
answers4: You may take this as a detogatory answer, science, was and
is created by man, war is created, by hatefullness. science is real,
its everyday and allday. It can be a blessing, or it can be destroyed.
At the end of the day there will be no future, for you or me, and
whomever look like us. Hate to feel this way.
answers5: A knife can be used to take lives, or to prepare food that
nourishes. <br>
It is a tool, subject to the will of the wielder. Science is no different. <br>
<br>
To even consider the possibility that science can be held responsible
for political ambition and the failings of human greed is laughable.