“In a world view and in a regional view, it would be irresponsible if we didn’t use technology and science.”
it would be? what the heck does anyone mean by irresponsible? what are we comparing or what is our basis of responsibility?
There’s no universal answer to that question. To you it’s irresponsible to not use technology and science. To others it’s irresponsible to use technology and science. And many variations in between. There’s no final arbiter of responsibility. If there is, let me know. I’d like to talk to that authority because I have many questions needing a final judgment.
Do I think “science” gets us closer to what is actually happening? sure. Does that make science the way to live your life? I don’t know. No one can define the goal or the success metrics of life or existence so it’s hard to say what the best approach to existence is.
Is this a metaphysical argument with no bearing on the real world? naw. the fact is, none of us know what the deal is with life, success, responsibility. I suppose we can define it or whatever. It’s pretty arbitrary no matter how you slice it.
Do I think a science of behavior (and every other well thought out empiricist science) is a useful approach to living? Sure, with caveats. If your goal is to survive and thrive in your lifetime within our societies, a knowledge of human behavior is extremely useful! To some, I’m not sure that’s their goal. For nature, there’s no real goal so we don’t get the benefit of appealing to a universal goal ( or even a species goal!)
So, what really is the point?
Your internal interrogatives listed above have taken care of all the answers relative to the context of all your questions you posed so there is nothing to point at now.