2nd homework(science)

Real and lasting victories are those of peace and not of war

Science 2nd point

The scientific development concept,[1] sometimes translated as the scientific development perspective, is the current official guiding socio-economic ideology of the Communist Party of China (CPC) incorporating scientific socialism, sustainable development, social welfare, a humanistic society, increased democracy, and, ultimately, the creation of a Socialist Harmonious Society. According to official statements by the CPC, the concept integrates "Marxism with the reality of contemporary China and with the underlying features of our times, and it fully embodies the Marxist worldview on and methodology for development."[2] The ideology stems from the basic premise that it is possible for the state to engineer sustainable development through tested and proven methodologies of governance. Such a scientific approach is said to minimize conflict amongst different interest groups in society in order to maintain stability on the national level, in turn fostering economic and cultural advancement. The ideology is recognized by observers as a comprehensive response to the ideological gap left by the social problems that resulted from China's market economic reforms. Credit for the theory is given to former Chinese leader Hu Jintao and his administration, who was in power from 2002 to 2013. It is the newest slogan added to the idea of Socialism with Chinese characteristics ratified into the Communist Party of China's constitution at the 17th Party Congress in October 2007. It is lauded by the Chinese government as a successor and extension ideology to MarxismLeninism, Mao Zedong Thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory and the Three Represents.

3rd point

he left's war on science begins with the stats cited above: 41 percent of Democrats are young Earth creationists, and 19 percent doubt that Earth is getting warmer. These numbers do not exactly bolster the common belief that liberals are the people of the science book. In addition, consider cognitive creationistswhom I define as those who accept the theory of evolution for the human body but not the brain. As Harvard University psychologist Steven Pinker documents in his 2002 book The Blank Slate (Viking), belief in the mind as a tabula rasa shaped almost entirely by culture has been mostly the mantra of liberal intellectuals, who in the 1980s and 1990s led an all-out assault against evolutionary psychology via such Orwellian-named far-left

groups as Science for the People, for proffering the now uncontroversial idea that human thought and behavior are at least partially the result of our evolutionary past. There is more, and recent, antiscience fare from far-left progressives, documented in the 2012 book Science Left Behind (PublicAffairs) by science journalists Alex B. Berezow and Hank Campbell, who note that if it is true that conservatives have declared a war on science, then progressives have declared Armageddon. On energy issues, for example, the authors contend that progressive liberals tend to be antinuclear because of the waste-disposal problem, antifossil fuels because of global warming, antihydroelectric because dams disrupt river ecosystems, and antiwind power because of avian fatalities. The underlying current is everything natural is good and everything unnatural is bad. Whereas conservatives obsess over the purity and sanctity of sex, the left's sacred values seem fixated on the environment, leading to an almost religious fervor over the purity and sanctity of air, water and especially food. Try having a conversation with a liberal progressive about GMOsgenetically modified organismsin which the words Monsanto and profit are not dropped like syllogistic bombs. Comedian Bill Maher, for example, on his HBO Real Time show on October 19, 2012, asked Stonyfield Farm CEO Gary Hirshberg if he would rate Monsanto as a 10 (evil) or an 11 (fing evil)? The fact is that we've been genetically modifying organisms for 10,000 years through breeding and selection. It's the only way to feed billions of people. Surveys show that moderate liberals and conservatives embrace science roughly equally (varying across domains), which is why scientists like E. O. Wilson and organizations like the National Center for Science Education are reaching out to moderates in both parties to rein in the extremists on evolution and climate change. Pace Barry Goldwater, extremism in the defense of liberty may not be a vice, but it is in defense of science, where facts matter more than faith whether it comes in a religious or secular formand where moderation in the pursuit of truth is a virtue.
Science vs religion

Science and religion are two different aspects of life. Both have their own importance and value. History tells us that the two have always been in conflict in the beginning; religion was all important and reigned supreme in every spare of life. But gradually its place was taken by science. Today science is far more important than religion. There are basic differences between the outlook of science and religion. The outlook of science is rational. Science believes in experiment and observation. It teaches its followers that nothing is to be believed until it has been proved to be true through experiment. Religion, on the other hand, is a matter of faith. It teaches its followers to believes and have faith in the teaching of religious teachers and the authority of religious books. Thus whatever is written in the VEDAS or the GITA is true, for it is the word of GOD himself. The existence of god cannot be proved but it can be felt by those who have faith. It is all a matter of faith and not of experiment or observation.

Scientific truths are tentative. Science believes that nothing is absolutely true. What is regarded as true today may be proved to be false the very next day by further experiments and observations. Thus, there was a time when the earth was supposed to be motionless and the sun was supposed to go round it. Gradually science proved that this was wrong and showed that it is the earth which goes round the sun. Similarly, Newtons law of GRAVITATION held the day till Einstein came out with his superior theory of relativity. In this way, science advances towards truth as absolute. Whatever is written in religious books is regarded as absolutely true. Anyone who criticizes the teaching of religion is considered to be a heretic and is violently condemned. In the past, those who dared to question a religious truth were mercilessly persecuted and punished. The example of GALILEO readily comes to mind in this connection. In short, science is progressive and dynamic while religion are static and orthodox. Science advance from the particular to the general laws and principles. Thus, NEWTON saw an apple falling, observed a number of other similarity phenomena, and finally developed, on the basis of his observations his famous laws of gravitation. Religion, on the other hand, works from the general to particular. Its methods are entirely different from those of science. Scientific laws and theories are based on a much sounder foundation than the principles of religion. With the advance of science, religion has gradually lost ground. Its truths have been subjected to searching analysis by science, one after another, and have been proved to be false. The methods of science have appeared more convincing and rational and people have gradually lost faith in religion. Science has also conquered the heart of the people by its practical utility. The practical applications of its laws has provided man with undreamed of comforts and luxuries, religions has no such visible and material benefits to offer. However, science has its own limitations. Man has a body as well as a spirit. Science is concerned only with the body; it can do nothing for the sprit. Science may provide man with physical comforts, but it is religion alone which can give him the courage to struggle against heavy odds. He may even face death itself, with a smiling face. It is religion and religion alone, which can bring the healing balm for his wondered spirit. In the end it may be mentioned that religion is a social phenomenon as well as personal and individual. It is all a matter of individual belief. Science has weakened religious faith is only as it is a social phenomenon. Science has not been able to touch religion, even the least, in its personal and individual aspects. There are people even today whose faith in the name of the religion remains unshaken and who can still make the maximum sacrifice in the name of religion. It would, therefore be wrong to say that science has made man irreligious or that it is an enemy of morality.
SST

Ever since the achievement of independence India has been assiduously striving for the promotion of peace. She has unbounded faith in peace. She believes that peaceful conditions alone can hold out any hope for the deliverance of mankind from the rut of so many ills it is at present plagued with.

As soon as she got independence, she declared her determination to pursue the path of peace and take effective measures for the promotion of international peace, security and co-operation. This faith of India is peace is in keeping with her ancient tradition and her won genius. India can be singled out as a nation which has hardly ever waged wars of aggression simply for selfaggrandizement. Mahavir Swami and Gautama Buddha tirelessly preached against all kinds of violence. Their teachings were no heeded, but also acted upon by Indian emperors. India had learnt from Mahatma Gandhi that stable pace could be found on the improvement of economic condition of the people. When India got freedom, she was faced with the gigantic task of meliorating the economic condition of her masses. She beloved that economic prosperity and freedom were indivisible. Hence world peace was essential not only for her own economic development, but also for the economic development of all the backward countries of the world. There are a number of powerful planks on which India's policy of living in peace with and for promoting peace among nations of the world rests. They are (1) Non-alignment, (2) Peaceful coexistence, (3) Economic and cultural co-operation, (4) Disarmament and use of nuclear energy for peace, (5) Settlement of international disputes by peaceful means, (6) Support for nationalist movements in different parts of the world, (7) Ending of apartheid, old and new types of colonialism, imperialism etc. (8) Support for the U.N.O. In the world full of powerful nations, armed to the teeth and filled with bellicose tendencies, India declared herself as a non-aligned country not joining either of the two powerful military blocs. As a non-aligned country, India along with other non-aligned countries was in a position to act as a powerful moderating force between the two warring groups. Non-alignment became a bridge between the eastern bloc committed to communist ideology and the western bloc committed to democratic ideology. Panchsheela was conceived as a powerful weapon against war. The five principles of Panchsheela constitute an important and historic event in the history of international relations. These five principles should be acted upon if the world is to avoid another holocaust (destruction) of global war in which there will be no victor nor any vanquished. In the doctrine of Panchsheela India has contributed a great idea of peace to the war-weary world. India has consistently pleaded the cause of disarmament. She took a leading part in signing the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963. She has advocated the use of nuclear energy for peaceful or constructive purposes. Though capable of developing an atomic device for military purposes, she has refrained from manufacturing an atom bomb despite the fast that their communist neighbor has exploded many atomic devices and constitutes a potential threat to her freedom and territorial integrity. India stands for the solution of all international problems by peaceful means like adjudication, arbitration, mediation, etc. She herself has set examples of the same in her own case. Following her conflict with China, India accepted Colombo Proposals in order to avoid future wars with China and settle all her outstanding disputes with the latter by peaceful means. In 1965 India

agreed to abide by the judgment of an international court of arbitration on her Kutch dispute with Pakistan. India has been of the view that continuance of Colonialism, racial discrimination and imperialism in any form in a serious menace to peace. The recognition of sovereign equality of all people living in various part of the world, and all nations' right to political freedom is the fundamental factor in India's foreign policy. From the very beginning she began to champion the cause of nationalist movements in Asia and other parts of the world. An Asian Relations Conference was organized by Late. Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru with the sole object of getting the world to focus attention to this issue. India has rendered her full support to the united Nations in the task of putting an end to worldwar. Also she contributed her share of U.N. troops to keep peace in the Congo, Gaza Strip and Cyprus. She responded to the U.N. call for declaring cease-fire in her conflict with Pakistan. She looks upon the U.N. as a major instrument for brining about reduction in international tension. A role of great importance that India has played in international understanding is a happy synthesis of non-conflicting ideology. She has advanced her own brand of democracy and socialism and fused them into a happy combination of democratic socialism over ideological issues. Further it has tried to bring home to people having different ideologies that the world is large enough for the existence and peaceful accommodation of different political systems. The above discussion aptly bring out the most significant contribution India has made to world peace and to the promotion of healthy relations among the nations of the world which is standing on the dry hay-rich, waiting for a match-stick with full potentialities of setting it ablaze. Let us hope that India would go on striving for world peace.