Supposedly, when Galileo recanted his claim that Earth orbited the Sun, he whispered something like “Nevertheless, it does.” The guy was arguably the very first scientist in his adherence to experiment over predisposition and contemporary opinion. Eventually, others adopted his rational approach to Nature or independently discovered it on their own. The result is every modern convenience and modern science. Yet, here we are centuries later, still struggling with predisposition and science, still struggling to find a balance between our contemporary opinions and our desire to know, to explore, and to invent.
The topic arises because we can be ethical beings. It’s one thing to make a primitive telescope and discover moons orbiting Jupiter. It’s another thing to experiment with humans, other organisms, or ecologies in the name of science. Somewhere between the extremes of discovery and debasement and between invention and destruction lie what we consider to be the objects and objectives of science.
Here’s a short list of three comments to consider. Think of yourself as Galileo or Giordano Bruno kneeling before the Inquisition, threatened with imprisonment or death over whether what you have done, intend to do, or what you have reasoned is worthy of further pursuit.
What do you think?
The topic arises because we can be ethical beings. It’s one thing to make a primitive telescope and discover moons orbiting Jupiter. It’s another thing to experiment with humans, other organisms, or ecologies in the name of science. Somewhere between the extremes of discovery and debasement and between invention and destruction lie what we consider to be the objects and objectives of science.
Here’s a short list of three comments to consider. Think of yourself as Galileo or Giordano Bruno kneeling before the Inquisition, threatened with imprisonment or death over whether what you have done, intend to do, or what you have reasoned is worthy of further pursuit.
- Adler astronomer Lucianne Walkowicz, the Baruch S. Blumberg NASA/Library of Congress Chair in Astrobiology and a guest on National Geographic’s Mars, said, “It’s been troubling to me to hear people erasing what’s going on here on our own planet both from an environmental standpoint and an indigenous rights standpoint when they talk about going to other planets.” She makes this comment in light of another one in which she says that in going to Mars, humans will transform the planet, possibly negatively affecting any life that exists there. She also said, “There’s the matter of inclusion..We have to think about the way we talk about who goes to space….”
- Cosmologist Dr. Chanda Prescod-Weinstein of the University of Washington and a fellow at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center said, “Do we have the right to make that choice [of changing potential evolution] for the [Martian] ecosystem?”
- Jocelyn Kaiser and Dennis Mormile reported in 2015 Scienceonline that “a Chinese team had altered the genetics of a human embryo….” According to the report, microbiologist Guo-Qiang Chen of Tsinghua University said, “My personal opinion is that as long as they can control the consequences they should continue this work.”
What do you think?
RSS Feed