Rileys Freaky Fridays

Science isn’t a person or a company. So while scientists, research firms, think tanks, etc. may have their own mission statements, there isn’t one single statement that applies to “Science”.
And I doubt you could get a consensus from all scientists as to what that statement should be, anyway.

As to the purpose of science once they have answers - to ask new questions.

The scientific method allows the construction of structures of truths (where a truth is some hypothesis that has been validated by the method). Science is a consensual process, so if people agree something is a scientific truth (e.g. because it can be verified experimentally by anyone, given that the conditions for the specific true proposition hold) then others can use it to base new hypothesis and scientific thinking. So finding answers makes it possible to pose and answer new questions and so on.

Notice that since the process of science is consensual, a complete “truth” structure could be built on false premises. When the foundation is proven wrong the complete structure that relies on it collapses. As an example take the case of geocentrism. A lot of astronomical work was done based on the assumption that the earth was the center of the universe. It became harder and harder to explain things (i.e. the structure was built in a way in which answering certain questions was near to impossible). In the above case, e.g. to explain the movement of planets in the skies. The destruction of the geocentric model, and its replacement for a heliocentric model allowed old questions to be answered easily and many more questions to be answered. So not always does science move forward. There are false starts, wrong paths, backtracking, etc. But at any point in time the scientific structure of truths can be used by any scientist to do more science!

No. We just do it. It’s part of what it means to be human, and there doesn’t have to be a reason or a “grand mission.” It’s just what we do.

Each settled question raises more questions, and off we go again.

Having unloosed the foxes of the mind
To run about the margins of the world
With the five hounds the sense has close behind
The hunter who in his eagerness has hurled
Himself astride the swift steed of the wind
Fit charger for so furious a chase!
Shall be companioned by no easy friend.
To alien vistas shall he turn his face.

Yet he shall feel a surging in his blood
Like troubled waters at the flush of spring
And know it clean, and vigorous, and good;
And as his mount streaks through the evening
He shall behold upon a darkening hill
The hounds yet fleet–the foxes fleeter still!

–Byron Herbert Reece
Demorest GA, 1947

to understand the world around us. If we know how to grow crops, we can eat. If we understand dangers we can stay alive. If we learn how to use tools and material we can build shelter, and so on. Science is documented observation. When we record events and look at the record, we see patterns and trends, from which we draw conclusions. These conclusions are tested and the results recorded. If the results differ from expectations, we wonder why and investigate, and in the course of this investgation we learn many things and ask many questions, which are investigated and documented, and the store of knowledge grows. The conclusions continue to be refined and corrected as more people look at them in different ways, so we have not only more, but also better information. This knowledge benefits all of mankind. Science is mandated with the collection and refinement of knowledge.

Ha. The more we learn, the more questions we have. We’ll never be done exploring everything.

We publish what we discover. There are thousands of scientific journals out there for anyone to read.

Let’s cut through all the smoke-filled opinions and break this definition down in layman’s terms.

To establish an exact science, you must start with a hyposthesis. You have to demonstrate the ability to prove this information repeatedly. At any given time someone in the communtiy should be able to prove this theory given the hyposthesis parameters.
In short, it cannot be a science unless it is proven and can be repeatedly without fail.

Hope this clears it up…

It would be egotistical to presume that this could happen, but let’s say it did. Scientists would still work to help people learn and understand science. Knowing how things work conveys great advantage. We could do better inventing and engineering. We could better help solve society’s problems. We could spend less time figuring how how the universe works, and thus more time figuring out how best to use that knowledge. You could argue that science is done once it has found all the knowledge. A person who is only a scientist would have nothing to do. If it happened, you’d see there aren’t many pure scientists in the world.