AAAS Science and Society series continues

by Irma S. Jarcho

As noted in our Spring 1998 issue, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), as part of its centennial celebration, is publishing weekly essays by prominent Americans. Although most of the essays are by scientists, quite a number are also by artists, writers, and journalists -- and two to date consist of students' reactions to and appreciation of science. These are among the best in the series.

It would be too long a task to comment on all the essays which appeared in the roughly four-month intervening period. There are twenty of them, and selection has been made notably difficult by the excellence of the essays and the interest of their contents. I have attempted to limit my choices in accordance with the criteria established in our spring issue -- essays relevant to the scope and mission of the Clearinghouse.

Roald Hoffman of Cornell University, in his "Movement of the People," discussed the benefits America has derived from its immigrants. Since he is an immigrant himself, this is a very personal quest, so that he finds it difficult to be dogmatic in his responses to the concerns he hears about immigrants on whom we depend in so many ways, not just the immigrants at the bottom of the economic ladder -- as he puts it, "the nannies and cleaners in our society" -- but also those at the top. These "provide the Ph.D.s that American students, especially American males, now avoid -- and that the economy craves."

Hoffman's responses to concerns about the problem of immigration are varied, and he discusses each in turn. To those who say "In time it will be one world, and it does not matter where people work," he cites discrimination he sees among nationalities in European universities and industry, where economic unification is supposed to be underway. He agrees with those who exclaim, "If my students go back, they will never be able to do the science they are capable of doing here," but he argues that the return of these scientists will be better for their countries, if not for themselves. He writes that those who feel that "It's up to the government to set immigration policy" are evading social responsibility and committing a "morally and politically risky act." Yet, though he feels strongly about the benefit a U.S.-trained scientist can bring his or her native country, he acknowledges respect for anyone who asks "How can I say no to the pleas of an individual to help him change his visa? He's my student!"

Garrett Hardin, in "Extensions of 'The Tragedy of the Commons,'" recounts the tale of how he wrote, rewrote, and countless times modified his remarkable essay. For the last thirty years (it appeared in 1968) it has remained the basic document of the ecology movement which, in a very real sense, he helped to found.

The message of the 1968 essay is still true today. Individualism is still cherished, but it is more and more controlled by, as Hardin puts it, "mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon." He insists that we have been, as he puts it, "deplorably non-numerate," and that we must now take account of the exponential growth of living systems, while resources appear to be defined. Hardin says that he should have qualified the commons in his paper as an "unmanaged" commons. A managed commons may work -- 'the devil is in the details.' "But with an unmanaged commons, you can forget about the devil. An overuse of resources reduces carrying capacity, ruin is inevitable." Hardin's pessimistic appraisal seems closer to the reality we dread.

James Lovelock, formulator of the Gaia hypothesis, which holds that the Earth is a self-regulating system, writes, in "A Book for All Seasons," that we seem impossibly confident that the realities we enjoy today will continue uninterruptedly into the future. We would not travel to an unfamiliar country without guarding against hazards we might encounter but "we are amazingly unprepared for our journey into the future." We ignore the hazards of volcanoes, of global warming, forgetting that devastating geophysical events are a normal part of Earth's history, confident that major catastrophes will not occur in our lifetimes. Lovelock states that "this tendency leaves us unprepared for extreme natural events and for surprises. . . ."

An excellent suggestion, it seems to me, is to in some way encapsulate the basis of our civilization, the way a germ encapsulates itself. Putting down where we are and how we got here would help, but no such record exists. Worse still, the language of contemporary science Lovelock considers incomprehensible to anyone not in the specialty. The record Lovelock envisions -- and he gives a summary of what it might contain -- would not be on any medium that needs a computer and electricity to be read. "What we need is a book written on durable paper with long-lasting print" -- clear, unbiased, accurate, and up-to-date. Lovelock envisions such a book of science as earning "the respect needed to ensure its place in every home, school library, and place of worship."

Freeman J. Dyson, in "Science As A Craft Industry," sees science as giving birth to a new golden age of craft industry at the time that it seemed that craftsmen are dwindling because of mass production. Experimental science is ever producing new instruments, using new materials and new concepts, and it is being carried out by young people launching start-up companies. Dyson charts the progress of the computer as a craft industry, soon superseded by the big producers. The computer industry gave birth to another craft industry -- the production of software, a craft which still flourishes.

Dyson describes similar craft industries in the biological sciences: "DNA libraries," whose collections are sold to laboratories in genetic research. He sees the craft industries of the future "concerned with neurophysiology or ecology, with technologies not yet invented or with sciences not yet named."

Edward Teller in "Science and Morality" presents a slice of his personal history, relating to his role in recommending the development of the hydrogen bomb. Teller examines the possibility that our success in developing this weapon of mass destruction played a significant role in our Cold War victory.

In "The Shoulders of Giants" Dara Horn recounts the cautionary tale of Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin, whose discovery of the prevalence of hydrogen in the universe was rejected by eminent astronomers Henry Norris Russell and Harlow Shapley, who persuded her to dilute the claim in her thesis (the first from either sex in Harvard's astronomy department), although Russell published a similar claim four years later. She stayed on at Harvard and became its first female tenured professor, after being passed over for promotion numerous times. Her major insight has never been honored, nor has credit been given her for her monumental discovery.

Sir Arthur Clarke, in "Presidents, Experts, and Asteroids," starts out by saying that science and technology have been the chief drawing forces shaping our world. According to Clarke, they decide the kinds of futures that are possible, but human wisdom decides which are desirable. Clarke is appalled (as many of us are) at the fact that so few of our politicians have any scientific or engineering background. However, even if there were science-educated politicians, how can they make good decisions if even the "experts" disagree?

Clarke mentions and discusses several controversial topics including human cloning, the intrusion of creationism, and Star Wars proposals. Amusingly, he states that he has met a few "creationists" and, because they were usually nice, intelligent people, cannot decide whether they are really mad, or only pretending to be mad. He discusses the slowly dawning realization that the history of this planet has been modified by physical impacts from space. The controversy here is "How much effort should be devoted to a danger that is probably remote, but that may sterilize our planet?" Rather to my surprise, he declares confidence in the "new energy" that started with the discredited work of Pons and Fleischmann. His final controversy is much on the front pages today -- global warming.

Peter Piot, who has worked tirelessly in the HIV/AIDS field, proposes, in "The Science of AIDS: A Tale of Two Worlds," that the research priorities of the work on AIDS must be modified. In 20 years over 40 million people have become infected, and every day 16,000 people acquire the infection, 90% of whom live in the developing world. Piot points out that enormous progress has been made on diagnosis, prevention, and treatment, but that this progress has been of little benefit to the millions in poorer countries which do not have access to diagnostic or treatment advances.

In addition, governmental policy does not seem to be affected by scientific evidence. We know needle-exchange programs will reduce the risk of HIV infection, but such programs are not supported by the government and, in many cases, are against the law. Similarly, sex education for teenagers has been shown to promote safer sexual behavior but is opposed by many governments, including our own. (Readers are probably aware of the fact that Congress appropriated huge sums for sex education, but focused only on abstinence.) As Piot points out, we know that condoms can protect against the spread of AIDS, but ads for their use are not allowed on prime-time television.

Piot points to the close involvement and great influence of "individuals and groups infected with or affected by HIV." He sees AIDS as promoting a more appropriate doctor-patient relationship and greater participation of communities in public health programs. He lists the lessons that can be learned from the AIDS epidemic, among them that we should never underestimate the potential for a global and massive epidemic posed by a health threat. The uncertainty surrounding the variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease related to "mad cow" disease is a case in point.

There are many gaps still in our knowledge of HIV, its prevention, and treatment. How do you care for the nearly 30 million people with HIV in developing countries? What chance do we have of developing a safe, effective, and affordable vaccine? This will be a true test of the application of advanced science to a social good.

Angela Merkel is a physicist who is a member of the German Parliament and has been the Minister for the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety. In her essay on "The Role of Science in Sustainable Development," she points out that "the ecological problems caused by human economic activity are worsening and taking on global dimensions." She insists that industrialized countries must accept special responsibility both because of their past sins and their present technological know-how.

Merkel lists a number of categories in which science must play an important role in the pursuit of sustainable development. These include -- and she discusses each at some length -- energy use, closure of substance cycles (environmentally friendly production processes), environmentally compatible mobility (including three-liter cars, electric cars, and computerized logistics in goods transport), and biotechnolgy, including advances in medical diagnosis and therapy and the use of genetically-altered organisms to break down pollutants.

With all due respect to Dr. Merkel, I find an essay on sustainable development that does not make a single mention of population and the problems caused by population increase to be an exercise in futility.

I have left for last my favorite essay in this series. Sixth graders in the C. H. Bird Elementary School in Sun Prairie, WI, were asked to write down what they think science is all about and the answers are amusing, perceptive, and extremely well thought out. Here are a few of their appraisals, titled "Hooray, Hooray! It's Science. The Sixth Grader's Perspective":

There are two comments I would make about these sixth graders' listings, which I urge you to read. One is that a number of the students had serious illnesses or operations and are fully cognizant of how advances in medicine and surgery helped them survive. The second is the bewildering variety of personal electronic gadgets these students possess -- TV, VCRs, CD players, radios, Play Station, Sega, computers, Internet, video games, ad infinitum.

Science and Society Essays in Science
Author Date Title
Roald Hoffman 17 April Movement of the People
Chen-Lu Tsou 24 April Science and Scientists in China
Garrett Hardin 1 May Extensions of the "Tragedy of the Commons"
James Lovelock 8 May A Book for All Seasons
Freeman J. Dyson 15 May Science as a Craft Industry
Edward Teller 22 May Science and Morality
Dara Horn 29 May The Shoulders of Giants
Sir Arthur Clarke 5 June Presidents, Experts, and Asteroids
Felice Frankel 12 June Envisioning Science - A Personal Perspective
Peter Piot 19 June The Science of AIDS: A Tale of Two Worlds
Gory Delacte 26 June Putting Science in the Hands of the Public
John Banville 3 July Beauty, Charm, and Strangeness: Science as Metaphor
C. H. Bird Elem. Sch. 10 July Hooray, Hooray! It's Science! The Sixth-Graders' Perspective
Angela Merkel 17 July The Role of Science in Sustainable Development
Douglas R. Hofstader 24 July Popular Culture and the Threat to Rational Inquiry
Hans C. Binswanger 31 July The Challenge of Faust
Takashi Tachibana 7 August Closing the Knowledge Gap Between Scientist and Non-Scientist
Helen Anderson 14 August Living on the Edge
Melvyn Bragg 21 August Opportunity Knocks!
Margaret J. Geller 28 August The Black Ribbon



Home          Fall 98          Full Screen

The TEACHERS CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY EDUCATION