The development of science has always fascinated philosophers. Plato already told that « no one can enter here (in his school) if he is not a geometre ». this approach is showing how science has always been considered as the first tool of progress. Later Condorcet said that « littérature has limits, science doesn’t ». Those approaches are supported by Descartes in this approach : he wanted to put science in the center of knowledge, and give him the important place it deserves to have. It happen in a context where only theology could be learnt in universities until only the XVIth century. We can say that science has been reinforced by the emancipation of the states from the Church. The competition between the emerging states led to a race in military, economical and technological power. The economcics became more and more mobiliar. Those changes led to a more and more important need in science. This investment changed a lot the approach of science. That is the reason why France, in the XVIIth century, wanted to be a scientifical nations. Great scientists came during this century, for instance Pascal.
The XVIIIth century showed the generalization of liberalism, especially in England. Science was an important tool of the development of the emerging industrial revolution. For instance electricity was led in this country. The development of vapeur, or telegraph, later in the XIXth century, shows again that science, as told Marx, is the motor of history as it is the most important means of production.
However, later, the faith in progress and in science found its limits. First the first world war, and the use of chimical weapons, showed that science is not necessary an ethical tool. This approach is showed in the approach of environment. Descartes told that mankind must be the « master and owner of nature ». This approach was already encouraged by the Bible, where God gave the human the ownership of nature. But we can say that nature is more and more a subject of concern. The approach of progress is put into question. The successes of science are not enough.
New questions arise. The emergence of artifical intelligence is showing that science is not necessarily ethical. The use of China of this tool are a way of surveillance is reminding the world of Orwell in 1984. But the new Cold War that is emerging is illustrating the predominance of science in the human knowledge. Because the race in science and technologies will be more and more at the heart of this war, even more than the war with the USSR.
Philosophers for instance have always showed reverence in front of science, as told Badiou in his book « greeting mathematics ». However philosophy can contribute to give to science more ethical paths, and to ask more questions to it. As uncertainty often leads, in the long run, in the progress of science (the book of Thomas Kuhn is telling about that), probably philosophy can contribute to ask questions to science. At the era of the industrial revolution we live in, philosophy has a role to play.
The observer 