How far would science be now if no one was discriminated against?

Question

If women and minorities were allowed to be educated way back in the day.... how far do you think we would be?

Answer 1

We would be a lot further because it was very neive to think that minorities and women were not as smart as the typical white male. Think of Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King or Reverend Ralph David Abernathy... Daisy Bates... Lewis H. Latimer... Nathaniel Clifton... Charles H. Houston... Frederick Douglass... Jesse Owens... Bill Cosby... Louis Armstrong... Thurgood Marshall... the list goes on and on. Imagine if some of these people were allowed to contribute more to society. It boggles the mind.

Answer 2

Same as it has today.

Almost all scientific discoveries have been made by white, euro, males.

That's because women aren't smart enough, and "minorities" were still living in grass huts when white, euro males were figuring out the universe.

Bimbos who talk about Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Reverend Ralph David Abernathy, Daisy Bates, Lewis H. Latimer. Nathaniel Clifton. Charles H. Houston... Frederick Douglass, Jesse Owens, Bill Cosby,Louis Armstrong and Thurgood Marshall are so confused that they think protesting, making jokes, writing legal opinions, preaching and playing the trumpet are the same as science.

here's a clue: They aren't.

Answer 3

Probably not much different. You've grown up in an era of nearly universal access to education. This is a very new phenomenon. "Way back in the day"(a useless trite phrase if ever there was one--what day?) educational resources were quite limited and this had nothing whatsoever to do with bigotry. More with wealth. This was true as recently as the mid-twentieth century in the U.S. and is still true in much of the world. And research money is still not exactly unlimited.

Answer 4

The two variables in your question are "science" and "discriminated". Science is as a method with which we humans have learned to use as a tool to objectively perceive Nature. Discrimination is a human behavior based upon subjective perceptions of Nature. Subjective perceptions come and go through time like fashions of thought. But, objective perceptions of Nature are lasting, because, no matter what happens to a civilization, regardless of the libraries burned or the Dark Ages that plunder our progress, Nature will always be there for humans to perceive for the eternal subjective reality that it is. Whatever we see universally with our eyes to be true is the way of Science. Whatever we then chose to do with that knowledge, such as build clean nuclear energy facilities or nuclear bombs, is not in the realm of Nature, for her truths are simply there. And, it is not in the realm of a mere tool like Science. It is in the realm of the human conscience to chose a path of health with the revelations we perceive in Nature. As long as superstition and magical-thinking and barbaric paradigms of plunder and domination and hatred and intolerance are allowed to guide the human conscience, we will continue to blunder stupidly into such evilment as racial and sexual discrimination. "How far could humanity soar without the retarding social diseases of magical-thinking and intolerance" is the answer to your question.

Answer 5

I have no doubt that we would be further along based on simple statistics: more people participating would have increased the probability of scientific discoveries. I don't necessarily think they would have discovered something we would have never discovered, but the speed of discoveries would have been faster.