In their articles, Pinker and Lehrer both provide excellent arguments in which they discuss the powerful effects science and scientific movements have had on society. In his writing, Pinker dissembles the opposing opinions others have provided. He states, “. . .the intrusion of science into the territories of the humanities has been deeply resented.” Throughout his article, he explains the boundaries society has placed around science. The most prominent one is the line that has instituted between religion and science, which is still around even after the destruction of theocracy. Science is also the what those point and blame for things like war. However, Pinker argues that science is a means for understanding. It has led us to the discovery of nuclear weapons and theories of evolution, but it does not force the action of demolition or hate. Similar to this, Lehrer also discuses the restrictions put onto the explorations of science. He says “. . .our discoveries must get past their present limitations.” The only difference between these two arguments is that Lehrer provides the idea of art being a way to explain and better incorporate science into society.
There is a repeated theme throughout his writing where Pinker discusses how science is often blamed for destruction. He says, “The two world wars, the systematic slaughter of innocents. . . all these events involved, in various degrees, the application of scientific research to advance society.” I share the same belief with Pinker and that is that science should not be put to blame for the actions those have taken with it. Science has provided new ways of understanding and advancements. The purpose that these discoveries was and continues to be to advance our society and knowledge. The blame can only be placed on the misplaced intentions humans have used it for.
