Skip to main content

Scientific Democracy

Various issues of politics are derived from science. Issues that are directly related to the field of science. In today's scenario, politicians pick up the issues like nuclear research, environment, biotechnology, etc, which are the full time subjects of science, and try to politicize them. For personal benefits, they go against the welfare of public and scientific community. Rather, I think all this decision should be in the hands of a powerful yet responsible scientific community. A strong scientific democratic community has to be there so that issues won't be politicized anymore and science won't get in the hands of irrational buddies. 

Right from the bombs, artillery, weapons of mass destruction, they are produced in the labs of science but governments of the world have politicized them, proliferated its use against each other. They are also responsible for the rise of terrorism, which is empowered by the inventions of science. It's the high time that scientific community should be freed from the political pressure and re-establish a new form of government that would be based on pure scientific ideologies. (Even the judiciary has to be scientific in their proceedings.)

Politics stagnate the world progress that's why societies needs revolutions from time to time. A responsible, empathetic, and intellectual scientific democracy will avoid it. It will usher in a new scope, societies won't be needing any revolutions but it will learn to evolve gradually, at a required pace, with time and changing definitions. 

Scientific democracy's single point agenda is to grow the human mind capacity and push the common man into the world of science. A target set to remove all un-educated-ness, illiteracy, poverty from the face of the earth. A mind who knows and understands science will allow the scientific democracy to run and function well.  All the issues of health, education, development are fully embraced by science. In fact, no other than the scientific community understands these issues better. There are social issues too like gender inequality, LGBTQ issues, communal discrimination, poverty(Multidimensional aspects), crime, etc. Actually, these issues are the results of politicization. These subjects exist because of politics. Scientific democracy does not guarantee that it will kill every problem persisting the society but it has a better and effective solution. 

Inequalities always existed in some or the other form. The concepts of freedom, independence is vague or perhaps limited to an extent. As no one in this world is free and independent in the real sense. But above all this, Scientific democracy has all the capability to address the questions raised by the society. 

No Left, No Center, No Right. Nothing. Only Scientific Temperament. That's all enough. 


NOTE: It explains the scientific democracy in layman's tone and understanding. However, fine details and necessary implications of a practical scientific democracy has been not covered in it. It will be described in further posts. I am working on its various aspects and their implications.


Popular posts from this blog

धर्म के साथ मज़ाक नहीं...

ऐसा कहते हैं मेरे दोस्त। मेरे दोस्त जो किसी का मज़ाक बनाने से पहले, कोई नियम तोड़ने से पहले कभी ये नहीं सोचते की दूसरों पर उनकी हरकतों का क्या प्रभाव पड़ेगा। वो क्यों चाहते हैं कि मैं उन्हें समझूँ, उनके बारे में खयाल करूं। उनका ये मानना की धर्म से ऊपर कोई नहीं और धर्म का मज़ाक नहीं बनाया जा सकता बिल्कुल ही गलत और बेतुका है। क्योंकि जिस मॉडर्न लाइफस्टाइल में जीने का वो दावा करते हैं वो कभी न कभी किसी स्तर पर धर्म और संस्कृति को चुनौती दे कर ही इस अवस्था पर आया है।हर विचार की आलोचना की जा सकती, सबको आज़ादी है। जब हम समाज, राजनीति, विज्ञान, आदि के मुद्दों पर सवाल खड़े कर सकते हैं तो धर्म पर क्यों नहीं। अगर कोई धर्म को सवाल नहीं करना चाहता तो सिर्फ एक बेवकूफ इंसान है।

They ask me: Why are you an atheist?

I am actually no theist. That simply makes me an atheist. There are many reason I can enumerate but does that really matters. I think, no. As we don't ask anyone like why are you a christian or a moslem or a hindu etc. but why is that for an atheist? Does any of the arguments is really important for the person asking question. If yes, then I am ready to reason why I came to the default position of atheism. My only condition to share is that if you could rationally verify my arguments then read it otherwise close this blog and browse another page.