Editorial
Quote from J.Wojciechowski
R.W.Sperry -- [Science and the Problem of Values; excerpts]
Quote from P.Duffy Hutcheon
The Nature of Things (David Suzuki)
Thesis
Pat Duffy Hutcheon on Isaac Asimov; discussion
Humankind Emerging (Workshop for science teachers)
Antithesis
Bill Joy -- [Why the Future Doesn't Need Us; review]
Quotes from J.Wojciechowski
Synthesis
George Bugliarello -- [The Biosoma: The Synthesis of Biology, Machines and Society; review]
George Bugliarello -- Quote from Bridge-editorial
Editorial: During the last few weeks, I came across three remarkably thoughtful pieces of writing, which arranged themselves naturally -- even without change in the sequence I read them -- into the following organization:
THESIS
Without rationality and science, we cannot advance beyond the imperfections of the present.
ANTITHESIS
Too fast and uncontrolled advance of science presents far greater dangers than stagnancy and imperfection.
SYNTHESIS
The solution lies in a synthesis of biology, society, and machines: the understanding that advances of all these factors are interrelated.
To compare these three views was a most fascinating undertaking.
* * * * *
The more the future is different from the past, the less the past can serve us as an example and a teacher for evaluating concrete situations.
Jerzy Wojciechowski
Professor of Philosophy
* * * * *
Excerpts from "Science and the Problem of Values."
Despite the beneficial features of human domination, it becomes increasingly apparent that our biosphere is set today on a disaster course as a direct consequence of human intervention. The entire grand design of life, painstakingly evolved over millennia, suddenly is subject to instant destruction, depending only on some passing twist in human affairs. If nuclear extermination is being avoided, other inbuilt, self-destruct features are evident that threaten to bring all civilization to a halt -- if things continue as they are going.
- - -
Societal values tend to be self-corrective to a large degree and to change naturally in response to changing needs and conditions, but in these days of extremely rapid change the time lag is defeative. By the time a voting majority becomes ready to recognize and endorse new values, as it now seems to be doing with respect to pollution and overpopulation, the situation will already have advanced far beyond the state of the optimal ideal toward a condition of intolerability.
- - -
The way to one possible answer can be seen broadly to lie in the fusion of science, ethics, and religion that would bring the insight, knowledge, and principles of science to bear upon the whole problem of values and value priorities.
R. W. Sperry (1972)
Neuroscientist and Nobel Laureate
* * * * *
Our power both to predict and alter effects has been increased exponentially by the progress of science. The positive message in what modern science implies for free will is that we are not condemned to use that power destructively. To the degree that choices are based on reliable knowledge and reason -- combined with the ability to imagine and evaluate possible future consequences -- we can participate wisely in the uniquely human task of guiding the course of cultural evolution.
Pat Duffy Hutcheon (1999)
Sociologist and Professor of Education
* * * * *
Accelerating progress of knowledge makes both, science education and life-long education, essential. And it is beginning. -- The present issue would be incomplete without drawing attention to an excellent Canadian Television series The Nature of Things, presented by David Suzuki. Suzuki's selections are an example of television at its best. They introduce the viewer to a wide range of science topics, from archeology, paleontology, physics, the formation of the cosmos, biological evolution, animal and plant life, medical innovations and much more in a language everyone can understand and with pictures no-one will forget. Any sensationalism is absent. You become one with the plants and animals shown, and you become one with the scientists during their research work. -- Most importantly, Suzuki's science, though dedicated to the highest standards, is not cold and heartless but pervaded with human warmth. -- Of special concern for him is damage to our environment, which to discover and prevent is one of his major aims. To pursue this task most effectively, and to invite help with it, he established the "David Suzuki Foundation." -- It's address is: 219-2211 West 4th Ave., Vancouver, BC V6K 4S2, Canada. Tel: (604) 732-4228.
===================================
THESIS
Without rationality and science, we cannot advance beyond the imperfections of the present.
Discussion of
The Legacy of Isaac Asimov
by Pat Duffy Hutcheon
Isaac Asimov's brilliant mind and clarity of explanation are fully matched by the reporter on the highlights of his thinking. Dr. Hutcheon describes Asimov's concern about the majority's thinking in Bronze Age concepts and its tight adherence to the mind-set of their tribe. She shows how the great thinker, who is equally productive as a science-fiction writer and a science educator, uses his vivid imagination to lift the masses out of their immersion in unfounded beliefs and up into the realm of rationality.
Moreover, he sets an example. Though Asimov has great admiration for the wisdom of his ancestors, whose outstanding knowledge was collected in the Old Testament around 500 B.C., he always emphasized that he does not believe in the superiority of his own people. "As soon as any one tradition is thought to be superior to others,...the way is paved for destroying them all." (P.18)
Culture, he believes, started with the mastery of fire. With that technological breakthrough not only weapons could be perfected and food could be prepared for the very young and elderly, but also opportunities to communicate with one another were expanded. The next technological breakthrough, animal husbandry and the growing of plants, led to more cultural advances. From 8000 B.C. onward, there was no turning back, and since that time, "no society has ever voluntarily given up the improvements in quality of life made possible by the current technology." (Emphasis added)... Asimov claimed that the successful societies at every juncture of history have been the ones that chose to advance. According to him, this move has always involved attempts to solve, by more appropriate social organization and the invention of ever better technology, the problems of adaptation -- including those problems created by previous advances in technology." (P.19)
World government, Asimov believes, has now become possible as well as imperative -- and the idea to abandon technology he considers "foolish." Should we return to the plagues and famines which prevented population explosions in `the god old days'? A much better solution is the education and liberation of women, whose suppression in most of the world is still a deplorable reality.
As a science fiction writer at home in outer space, he sees global cooperation as a prerequisite for expanding outward from our globe -- considering it a practical solution of a technical problem rather than sharing the ephemeric hope for a change of heart in all of us, which would be an utterly improbable miracle.
The magnificence of the universe itself he understands as a result of its interaction with our sense organs, a creation of our brains and our minds -- of our thoughts which contemplate it. Without humanity, its sense and meaning would vanish, and only incessant change and turbulence would be left. The mind which we perceive in the far yonder, the mind that cares for our welfare, is a reflection of our own. It is a remnant of infantile thinking and safety needs, which interferes with the resolve to solve our own problems. Unfortunately, it is still dominant in most of the world.
Accused of being too narrowly human-centered, Asimov responds that he is fully aware of the intrinsic interconnectedness of our own material and mental existence with all living and non-living entities in the universe. We are made from stardust -- and yet we are the most unique product of evolution. We have in us the power to consciously steer our fate into the right direction and to avoid the fatalistic acceptance of nature's injustice, including the abysses which have swallowed other species in their blind stumble ahead -- if we would just open our eyes -- if we would just outgrow our infantile reliance on faith and achieve the maturity to rely on science and reason alone. -- That is the legacy of Isaac Asimov.
- - -
Isaac Asimov was the most prolific and most admired science and science-fiction writer. -- Pat Duffy Hutcheon is a sociologist and former professor of education in Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
* * * * *
HUMANKIND EMERGING was the name of a free, three-day workshop for secondary science educators during June 22-25, 1999, co-sponsored by the Wright Center for Innovative Science Education and the Foundation for the Future. It has been held at the University of Washington campus in Seattle, Washington.
Using humans as the focus, the workshop addressed topics related to the teaching of evolution and the nature of scientific knowledge as profiled in the recently released National Academy of Sciences publication Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science.
Inspired by the National Science Foundation's Evolution and the Nature of Science Institutes (ENSI), this mini-conference combined innovative lab activities with renowned experts to provide teachers with an up-to-date view of humanity's past, present and future.
Such workshops are offered at no cost to participants. Priority is given to Seattle area teachers but is open to applicants nationwide on a space available basis.* These participants will receive free room and board at or near the university. All participants will receive meals at no charge. Participants will be expected to provide their own transportation.
---------------------
* Dr. Eric Chaisson, Director of Tufts University's Wright Center, asked me specifically to mention that Canadians are also welcome. (The program includes each year teachers from several non-U.S.A. nationalities.)
- - -
Goals of the workshop:
Increase teacher skills in effectively and accurately teaching about evolution and the nature of science.
Develop a network of colleagues to continue the dialogue of effective teaching practices for the concepts of evolution and the nature of science.
Provide a backdrop for developing a vision of the future of humanity for the coming millennium.
---------------------
[Funding for the workshops is provided by the H. Dudley Wright Foundation of Geneva, Switzerland.]
- - -
For more information please contact the Wright Center for Science Education, Tufts University, 4 Colby Street, Medford, MA 02155. Its web site is: http:www.tufts.edu/as/wright_center/index.html
ANTITHESIS
Too fast and uncontrolled advance of science presents far greater dangers than stagnancy and imperfection.
Review of
Why the Future Doesn't Need Us
by Bill Joy
A phone call: my home address is needed for an express parcel from the United States -- sender unknown to me. -- The "parcel" turned out to be a large express envelope containing a copy of WIRED with a single article in it -- an article someone obviously wanted me very much to read.
The effort was needed. Looking at the pictures between the pages alone, I would have thrown the issue out, considering it pure sensationalism and exaggeration -- fear induced by lack of knowledge. But I felt obliged to look at the writing and, for the first time in my life, took arguments against uncontrolled advance of science seriously.
Bill Joy's reasoning is powerful and undisputable. He is certainly not uninformed. As co-founder and Chief Scientist of Sun Microsystems and former cochair of the presidential commission on the future of IT research, he possesses unusual knowledge of and insight into the field he is talking about. He describes the new technologies of robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology as posing threats of a completely different kind than any technologies preceding them: "They can self-replicate. A bomb is blown up only once -- but one robot can become many and quickly get out of control." While he fully acknowledges the enormous promises of these new technologies, he warns of the unexpected power and danger that may result from "a sequence of small, individually sensible advances." Furthermore, the fabrication of nuclear weapons requires raw materials and knowledge practically out reach for any single person, and thus depends upon cooperation of large groups. For the new technologies, knowledge alone is sufficient, and small groups, or even single individuals can unleash unforseen disasters.
Finally, beyond only replicating themselves these elements of human creation would take on a life of their own. They would -- according to the inherent processes of evolution without brains and minds -- turn into constantly more sophisticated, more ruthless, and more resistant strains. Our hopeless fight against bacteria and viruses sets an example. Bill Joy warns of the "probability of many horrid outcomes that lie short of extinction."
The author's warnings are interwoven with accounts of his life experiences and his amazing thirst for knowledge, already at a very early age. In high school, mathematics, in which he excelled, was his favourite subject, and computers, with their astonishing precision and speed of thinking, fascinated him from the moment he heard of their invention. Soon he was himself involved in their further perfection, and with brilliant results. The last thing he could be accused of was to be anti-technological. His advances in computer-software were of such impact, that, to satisfy demands for them, he had to sacrifice his work toward a PhD. His "strong belief in the value of scientific truth" led from success to success, but his greatest challenge, and his greatest success was to extract himself from the dizzy rush forward to see the bigger picture -- the long-term consequences of advancing technology. "Failing to understand the consequences of our inventions while we are in the rapture of discovery and innovation," he contends, "seems to be the common fault of scientists and technologists."
As each invention enhances and reinforces other ones, technological progress advances at an exponential rate. "By 2030 we are likely to be able to build machines, in quantity, a million times as powerful as the personal computers of today....As this enormous computing power is combined with the manipulative advances of the physical sciences and the new deep understanding in genetics, enormous transformative power is being unleashed. These combinations open up the opportunity to completely redesign the world, for better or worse."
Bill Joy concentrates on the urgent need to prevent the worst. He quotes Eric Drexler on what nano-technologists refer to as the "grey goo problem," the ability of billions over billions of tiny replicaters to obliterate life in a more horrible manner than fire or ice, and he reports that Drexler, after writing his optimistic book Engines of Creation, became increasingly preoccupied with the dangers of unrestricted technologies and, to ameliorate or prevent them, started his Foresight Institute in the late 1980s.
Joy furthermore uses a one-page insert into his own article, condensed from "A Tale of Two Botanies," by Armory B. Lovins and Hunter Lovins (co-founders of the Rocky Mountain Institute), which compares nature's botanical evolution with that designed by human beings. Fundamental errors may occur simply by misunderstanding the way nature works. "In nature, all experiments are rigorously tested over eons....It's unwise to assume, as `genetic engineers' generally do, that 90-plus percent of the genome is `garbage' or `junk' because they don't know its function. That mysterious, messy, ancient stuff is the context that influences how genes express traits. It's the genetic version of biodiversity, which in larger ecosystems is the source of resilience and endurance."1
The problem of slowing run-away technology down is increased by the immense profits it brings. "In this age of triumphant commercialism, technology -- with science as its handmaiden -- is delivering a series of almost magical inventions that are the most phenomically lucrative ever seen." -- But more fundamental is the intoxication of the mind in the process of discovery and creation. The physicist Freeman Dyson describes it in relation to the unsuccessful attempt to prevent a nuclear arms race after Japan and Germany were conquered: "I have felt it myself. The glitter of nuclear weapons. It is irresistible if you come to them as a scientist. To feel it's there in your hands, to release this energy that fuels the stars, to let it do your bidding. To perform these miracles, to lift a million tons of rock into the sky. It is something that gives people an illusion of illimitable power, and it is, in some way, responsible for all our troubles - this, what you may call technical arrogance, that overcomes people when they see what they can do with their minds."2
Escape to other planets would not help, Joy says, because our minds would escape with us. He seriously suggests to limit the pursuit of certain knowledge, a solution with which most searchers for the truth (including myself) will feel extremely uncomfortable. Joy, however, sees it as the only alternative to species-suicide and thus a demand of common sense. Even belief in God, he maintains, is preferable to the truth of science if it prevents the extinction of humanity. The search for some superior values, ethics and morals uniting all human beings, though intense in some individuals, is not shared by the majority of persons now living and has shown no progress over thousands of years. If ethics and morals cannot advance, however, the craving for certain kinds of new knowledge becomes too hazardous and must be stopped. But is that possible?
"Yes!" Bill Joy says and describes a `shining example': "the unilateral US abandonment, without preconditions, of the development of biological weapons. This relinquishment stemmed from the realization that while it would take an enormous effort to create these terrible weapons, they could from then on easily be duplicated and fall into the hands of rogue nations or terrorist groups. The clear conclusion was that we would create additional threats to ourselves by pursuing these weapons, and that we would be more secure if we would not pursue them."
Yet, historical changes in ethical conceptions are being discussed. The book Fraternités by Jaques Attili convinced him that Fraternity is superior to previous ideals, because it is the basis of altruism: individual happiness is identified with the happiness of others. -- That ideal, Bill Joy believes, is best expressed by the Dalai Lama's insistence on love, compassion, universal responsibility and the realization of our interdependency. All this is contrasted with the Western ideal of material progress and power. Our creative powers are a positive factor, but they must be channelled into directions different from the relentless pursuit of economic growth.
The study of complex systems, Joy says, may be the new element which allows us to see our problems from a new perspective and to understand that one-sided advance of anyone aspect of the system will occur at the expense of all other ones and damage the health of the whole. -- But understanding alone is not sufficient. Without decisive action to stem our one-sided advance, a fatal avalanche will be unleashed. Our initiatives must be guided by foresight rather than a shock of recognition after matters have become irreversible.
We have to ask what is most important to us; for Bill Joy it's our humanity. "Each of us has our precious things, and as we care for them we locate the essence of our humanity. In the end, it is because of our great capacity for caring that I remain optimistic we will confront the dangerous issues now before us."
That statement is reinforced by the author's discovery that many persons share his concerns and demand caution and relinquishment of certain advances. His vision is one of an intense working together of the greatest minds on earth to prevent looming disasters -- a combined effort similar to that of the Manhattan project.
In conclusion, it should be noted that this article by a courageous, conscientious, and very knowledgeable and influential computer scientist has been reprinted by a considerable number of the largest media in the United States.
----------------------
Bill Joy is co-founder and Chief Scientist of Sun Microsystems. Unfortunately, I cannot supply page numbers after Bill Joy's quotes, as the pages in the copy I received were unnumbered.
1) Lovins, A.B. and Lovins, L.H. -- A Tale of Two Botanies.(Unabridged version available at www.rmi.org/biotechnology/twobotanies.html)
2) Dyson, F. -- Quoted from The Day after Trinity: Robert Oppenheimer and the Atomic Bomb by Jon Else (available at www.pyramiddirect.com).
* * * * *
Professor Emeritus Jerzy Wojciechowski (Philosophy), a frequent contributor to Humankind Advancing, has warned of the dangers of knowledge for decades. In a recent paper he says:
"The more knowledgeable we are, the more powerful we become and the more we require moral judgments for our survival."
- - -
"It is knowledge which fans our desires and provides the means of satisfying them. Strange as it may sound, without the likes of Copernicus and Galileo, Descartes and Newton, Lavoisier and Faraday, and the brilliant English toolmakers of the first half of the nineteenth century who revolutionized machine production, there would not have been modern capitalism and its excesses."
SYNTHESIS
The solution lies in a synthesis of biology, society, and machines: the understanding that advances of all these factors are interrelated.
Review of
The Biosoma: The Synthesis of Biology, Machines and Society
by George Bugliarello
The Chancellor and former President of the Polytechnic University in New York, George Bugliarello, treats technological advance from the viewpoint of an engineer. Values are not mentioned, but they are implicit in his concern with society and its laws. Not for him are emotion-arousing pictures and photographs; instead, he uses diagrams -- and plenty of them. But his acute and thoughtful treatment of the theme goes directly to the core of the issue: there is an alternative to unrestrained advance of technology or fear-induced objection to it -- a balanced advance of mental maturity and concern with our future and that of machines (first and foremost those which enhance our thinking, understanding, and insight).
Bugliarello calls "machines" everything that is intentionally created by the human mind, even sculptures and pictures which would usually be called "artifacts." This may seem a crude oversimplification, but once the reader's mind has aligned itself with that of the author, the advantage of his approach becomes evident. New and clear dividing lines appear in an otherwise hopelessly confusing clutter.
The name "Biosoma" was chosen by Bugliarello to describe the "indissoluble whole...that shapes our biological future and the future of society and machines, as well as the environment." That whole is divided into three parts, one of them (actual machines) distinguished by "definite performance," another one (biological organisms and social organizations and processes) by semi-definite performance, and the third (artistic creations) by indefinite performance. -- We are presently at a point where the processes that created us (evolution) demand the conscious input of our minds to prevent undesirable derailment of further advances.
The development of machines is traced way back to the development of the brains and minds that produced them, and their ultimate origins in the unfolding of the universe. Everything proceeded at an excruciatingly slow pace, in comparison to which present improvements appear explosive. Even when our ancestor's brains had already reached the capacity and inventiveness of our own and the first stone tools were fashioned, progress was sluggish, until it increased to dizzying proportions during the last two centuries, when the full grasp of scientific reasoning penetrated our society. Evolution had always created something that never existed before, but in a dreamlike fashion, without intention, and without being aware of it. All that changed when the human mind became a creator. From then on evolution included intent, purpose, plans that could be revised, and conscious experiments to test success -- leading to changes at ever increasing speed.
Bugliarello writes that the products of the human mind affected our biology and made it possible to spread over the entire globe, and that this interaction of minds, "machines" and society is a constant and fundamental phenomenon, we must take into account. He divides the past into the pre biosoma (before humans emerged from the forests), the primeval biosoma (until the end of the last Ice Age, 10 000 years ago), the paleo biosoma (from 10 000 to about 500 years ago), the mesa biosoma (until the end of the second World War), and, finally, the contemporary biosoma, beginning with the explosion of the first nuclear bomb, "in which our life is placed in balance between extraordinary achievement and unprecedented danger." -- Until the beginning of the contemporary biosoma, technological advance led, in general, to an increase in the quality of life and was to be promoted wholeheartedly. Now, however, serious questions must be asked to prevent the scale from tipping the other way. -- (Here, Bugliarello inserts Fig.5 into his manuscript, listing and explaining the time sequence of biosomas, with a large scale depicted under our present biosoma, showing the expectation of triumph and danger evenly balanced.)
Another perspective on biology, society, and machines is provided by looking at them in terms of materials, energy, and information, and how these aspects, common to all, differ among them. In the biological realm the material is skin, wood, etc., the energy produced by photosynthesis or mitochondria, and the information by genes or brains. -- "Machines" may be solid, unmoving structures (houses, bridges), energy providers (motors), or information providers (computers, telephones). Societies are shaped by their mastery of materials, energy, and information. Bugliarello draws attention to the relative emphasis, during the course of history, on different aspects of the biosoma, which presently concentrates on information. "Our future will depend," he says, "on how this interaction among the biosoma components -- our individual lives, our social organizations, and our machines -- will play out." (P.8) Thus, all aspects of the biosoma must constantly be adjusted to one another. Eternal laws and social structures would break the entire unit apart, just as surely as run-away technology.
The interaction among all components of the biosoma is the central theme of the author's message, which is treated in detail and with many examples throughout the main part of his work. For instance, he mentions that during the Roman Empire two thousand years ago, roads of such excellence were built that a trip from Rome to London took less than two weeks. Centuries later, in the Middle Ages, the roads were decayed and the same trip took several months. He ties this observation to the very long half-life of high-level nuclear waste and the question whether in the societies of the future present storage facilities will be adequately safeguarded. No human society, so far, has lasted the tens or hundreds of thousands of years needed to safeguard that waste.
Another of his concerns is the failure to adjust a societal framework to new technological inventions: "Some of the most dramatic examples occur in the military field. In World War II in France in the spring of 1940, the French Army had more tanks than the German Army. The German tanks were fewer in number and less sophisticated than the French ones. However, the Germans recognized that the tank was a new machine, a new weapon that required a new social organization. They concentrated their tanks in a new kind of military organization, the Panzer Division -- the Armored Division -- and with fewer tanks of inferior technical characteristics they were able to defeat the French Army." (Pp.11/12) Immediately, and in the same paragraph, Bugliarello compares that historical event with the problems caused by our present advances in gene diagnosis in conflict with an outdated insurance system, with the hunger of millions while food production increases, and with the homeless in the midst of surplus material for housing.
The problem, he thinks, is the disconnection among elements of the biosoma, which is reinforced by university education divided into separate departments. Engineering students learn nothing about biology or society, and vice versa. E.O. Wilson's book Consilience is mentioned as a valuable contribution to the integration of environmental policy, ethics, biology and social sciences, but it does not cover machines, which are important extensions of biology and society, though there is a fundamental difference. The creation of machines is always due to conscious design, while evolution of biological entities is self-propelled; it is internal, while machine production is external.
Other perspectives on the biosoma include individual versus collective machines (e.g. watches vs power plants), and it is observed that, in contrast to the time of our ancestors, machines for individual uses are built not by us but by huge collectives (companies). Thus, while we gain more freedom, we also become more dependent. -- Other topics deal with the function of machines. Of main importance is their extension of our senses as well as the capabilities of our societies. Many different uses are listed (including organ replacements, etc.) and, most of all, their ability of helping us to better understand how nature works. Bugliarello does here not speak of microscopes and telescopes, but of how the building, e.g. of computers, led to new insights into the functioning of the brain. -- Entirely new environments (e.g. cities) are created by machines, Suburbs could not exist without automobiles, and the existence of six million people on earth, without machines, is unthinkable. And yet, machines have ominous powers of destruction, not only as weapons, but also by increasing human-caused damages to the environment.
Bugliarello explains that an understanding of the biosoma will allow us to create new syntheses of its parts, offer us new vistas, and "can open a new chapter in the evolution of human thought." (P.21) For instance, "an understanding of the human-centric biosoma...leads us to think of a new society, transformed by a new perception of human needs and of the human potential." (P.24). He speaks of the need to "extricate ourselves from today's intellectual dead ends (such as the post modern society's fear and rejection of technology) and to develop a new global intelligence, way beyond McLuhan's pioneering concept of a global village." (P.25). In his Fig.12, the author lists five insights basic to the emergence of new thinking: "1) Biology, society and machines form an indissoluble synthesis - the Biosoma. 2) "Evolution" is no longer a purely biological process, but a biosomic one. 3) We can escape the earth's gravity. 4) We can create a global hyperintelligence. 5) We are engaged in a gamble with very high stakes. -- It is his hope that the global hyperintelligence will enhance our present biological and social intelligence by orders of magnitude. It should be emphasized that "consumerism" is one of the dangers he lists together with nuclear and biological warfare, etc. To "avoid falling victim to the unruly development of one component of the biosoma at the expense of the other ones"...."the urgent imperative is to achieve an understanding of the nature and dynamics of the biosoma." (Pp.27/28).
In other words, unregulated technological advance cannot and must not continue, but our thinking, our societies, and our laws must also advance to be able to take advantage of our incredible inherent potential.
-----------------------
Dr. George Bugliarello is Chancellor and former President of the Polytechnic University in New York. His work is based on a Keynote Speech at the Year 2000 Annual Meeting of the National Association of Science, Technology & Society." His address is 6 Metrotech Center, Brooklyn, NY 11201. E-mail:gbugliar@poly.edu
* * * *
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The manuscript on the Biosoma I received from Dr. Bugliarello does not address the dangers of run-away nanotechnology self-replication and its uncontrollable independent evolution, which Bill Joy foresees, but Bugliarello read Joy's article and recommends to take it seriously. A few days after I received his main-manuscript, he sent me a copy of his editorial in the Spring 2000 issue of The Bridge, in which he discusses Joy's publication. Only few see the future as harboring such terrors as Bill Joy describes, he believes, but also "only a minority view the future without ever removing their rose-colored glasses."
I will use one quote from the Bridge-Editorial to provide full insight into Bugliarello's striving for a more humane future. "The hope for all, affluent and poor alike, should be for technologies that will free humans from degrading and dangerous work, that will create new jobs and make possible better distribution systems for food and services. And the hope should be for the development of a global hyper- intelligence through the combined prowess of individuals, societies, and machines that would stamp out the foolishness of today's conflicts and extend to every human being the fruits of the creativity of engineers. Those fruits go beyond the material, the tangible, as they make possible a new vision of what it means to be human."
REFLECTIONS
All three scientists presented in the major articles of this issue draw attention to the need to complement technological advance with concern for its consequences, but their emphasis differs. For Isaac Asimov, the advantages of science and rationality are overwhelming and unquestionable, for Bill Joy the dangers predominate and the pursuit of run-away inventions must be curbed at all costs to prevent species suicide or indescribable horrors short of it. George Bugliarello steers a solid course between these two extremes. His emphasis is on balance between advance and caution, but, most importantly, he provides a new vision: the mutual adjustment of society's laws, organizations and technological progress, so that dangers and disadvantages are being defused, while simultaneously room is provided for a blossoming of the full human potential.
My attention has been drawn to two statements, one by Isaac Asimov, the other one by Bill Joy, expressing the view that "It has never been done before..." with the implication that it is therefore impossible. But one does not imply the other.
Isaac Asimov says: "No society has ever voluntarily given up the improvements in quality of life made possible by the current technology" and observes that, throughout history, all civilizations that were victorious were those who choose technological advance. -- But the situation has changed. Weapons of destruction have now become so powerful, that not only the enemy, but all human life on earth is threatened -- and biological or chemical weapons would be far less discriminating than nuclear ones. Even technology intended for good purposes may get out of hand and acquire a life of its own. Clearly, rational thought is now on the side of caution.
Moreover, the definition of "quality of life" is debatable. Maslow discovered that the thirst for material possessions can never be quenched, while work rewarded by nothing but the use of one's innate potentials leads to lasting happiness. As long as the most basic needs are fulfilled, additional possessions are only cumbersome, and their perceived need is culture-dependent (who is still longing for whigs and crinolines?). -- There were even times -- in the era of the French Encyclopedists -- when it was assumed that rationality demanded marriage for money alone, not love. How much unhappiness was created by that mistaken belief!
Bill Joy says: "The search for some superior values, ethics and morals uniting all human beings, though intense in some individuals, is not shared by the majority of persons now living and has shown no progress over thousands of years. If ethics and morals cannot advance, however, the craving for certain kinds of new knowledge becomes too hazardous and must be stopped."
Yes, but for centuries or even millennia the human craving to fly through the skies remained unfulfilled. Was it therefore impossible? No. We simply needed a new approach. Instead of copying the bird's flapping of wings with feathers glued to our arms, we studied and refined the principle of gliding on air. What would be the equivalent to advancing ethics and morals? -- I agree that human nature does not change, but there are always persons of excellent character in every culture and ethnic group. The secret will lie in finding ways to make these persons more influential and use them as role models, most importantly during the formative years of early youth. (Much of what is presently offered to young children through the mass media is simply criminal!)
Once that secret has been found, we can enjoy the double-advantage of progressing ethics and morals and progressing technology, of which Bugliarello speaks, with priority given to technologies that liberate the best potentials in each human being.
* * * * *
Acknowledgments: I wish to thank George Bugliarello for sending me the manuscript of his keynote speech for the National Association of Science, Technology & Society, Susan Stambough of SUN Microsystems for sending me Bill Joy's article in WIRED, Pat Duffy Hutcheon for drawing my attention to her article on Asimov in the Humanist in Canada, Eric Chaisson for sending me his information about the Wright Center's science teacher workshops, and Jerzy Wojciechowski for sending me his paper "Commentary on Unequal Freedoms..."
* * * * *
REFERENCES
Bugliarello, G. -- The Biosoma: The Synthesis of Biology, Machines and Society. Manuscript, based on keynote speech at year 2000 Annual meeting of the National Association of Science, Technology & Society. (U.S.A.) -- Author's address on p.20.
Bugliarello, G. -- Balance! [Editorial]. The Bridge, Vol.30, No.1, Spring 2000
Humankind Emerging -- Adapted from Pamphlet describing yearly workshops for science teacher education. Wright Center for Science Education. (Address on p.8.)
Hutcheon, P.Duffy -- John Dewey and the Question of Free Will. Humanist in Canada, No. 128 (Vol.32, #1) Spring 1999, Pp.6-10, and 13. [P.13]
Hutcheon, P.Duffy -- The Legacy of Isaac Asimov. Humanist in Canada, No. 132 (Vol.33, #1), Spring 2000, Pp.18-20, and 38.
Joy, B. -- Why the Future Doesn't Need Us. WIRED, April 2000.
Sperry, R.W. -- Science and the Problem of Values. Perspectives in Biology & Medicine, 16, 115-130. 1972. -- Reprinted 1974 in Zygon, 9, 7-21.
Wojciechowski, J. -- Commentary on Unequal Freedoms by John McMurtry. Paper read at the Canadian Humanities Congress, June 1999, University of Sherbrooke, during the annual meeting of the Canadian Philosophical Association.