img bp sci&religion

8/14/2019 IMG Bp Sci&Religion

1/36

THESCIENCE &RELIGIONISSUE

MADE SIMPLE

a JztrVz;tttqQ: a - l2t a /7"/'/2 /?177 /7./? CI "R\-:".r


2/36

THESCIENCE &RELIGIONISSUE

BROTDER PTR3PEOIVE' IS PUEUSIIED BY SCHOOTOTIHOUGHT420 Norlh Bridge Rood #0617, Norlh Eridge (enlre,Singopore 188/2/, www.sthoolollhought.tom.sghl:*65 6334 8//3.Iox:*65 6337 2434suBlcRrPTroll RAlls FoR 2008542 (12 issues,lonuorylo 0dober)Forsubs(hii0n enqui es0nd bork issues, emoil:brooderperspeoiv*@srhool ofthought.tomIIII EROADER PENSPTCTIVES IEATTEdilor in thief tliz0belh (on, [email protected] Diredor Shi00 Yin (uik, [email protected]'thoug ht.tomS0ler & Subs(ripli0n! [,l0n0qer Yee Tonq, yee@srhool ofthought.tom(0nrihuling Wriler xi00ding tinq,Jo5elin 80u, YeeT0ng,l{0dio M0h, Amelli0 R0z0k, fti0ng Hong l(eol, /!l0ry Leelnlern Amellio RozokPrinler lobez Prinling Hou5eS0le Dhtibulor Righleou! lnlern0lion0l 5ubs(ripli0n Servi(es/1 llhi (rcrcnl#{5.09 sinsopore 408571tel: 45 6323 l833. lox:.65 6323 1838emoil: [email protected]


3/36

ffiffi5 THINOS TO (NOW5 WAYS SIIINTISTSPIR(EIVI RII.IGION'l he nr cm s.ienrifi. .ofrnrninh.rs more th.rn one \'4.of dealins rdththc hoal] old chcstnut of ltcligion.

FEATURE ARTICLESCIENCE LOVES RELIGION \Nietzsche declared "God is Dead".Datukins urote that God was cr "Delusion"So why aren't mot'e scientists turnblg atheist?

04

30W#IUI-IUR[WAT(HSIANDATOUS SIIENIIGcl io know some ollIe nr.rslflovocr live :1D.1 fie books r\'rilterlaboui ihe science \'s. rcligioD debate.

REBOOIYOUR MIND

IAMOUS ILTUSIRAIIONSrN s0tN(tSchrddirgcr's Cat? Chincsc Roirlns?Pascal s \{''ager? Disc$er whatliesbehind ihese famo'ls relere|ces.

ON 2ND THOUGHTRETHINK MANOmripotcnt.O riscicrt.Is llankind rcalll as grcat as hc thillk?TSSAY MA|{EOVIRIHI MATRO MAl(IOVTRAiru dcnlonstr.rtion oihow aryuncntsshoultl flor'.

A MATTIR OF OPINIONTHI HINDU UNESTO BURIAUIRAIvs.IHt Nt0 LUDDITE()rrrM item s.rr.rc off on the issrre ofufi eiherscierce needito he nore resnhle.l in thelisht 0frercnt ad\ances. ''T()IAL V5. GLOBATONWARD SINGAPORE!lvhy d en t Singaporeans kicldng up as muchofa nus ovtl Sticncc s L$ical conhovcnics?


4/36

5 I|.|INGS TO l{NOW

ABOUTTllIWR]IIR

Five WaysScientistsPerceiveReligionIt is an age-old stereotype borne from theEnlightenment: that those who hinge their entirelife's work on erploring the world ruing Reason cannotever make sense of Faitl. We present five prevailingstock characteN representing varying beliefs withinthe modem scientific community. By xiaochiDg Ling

l0? 8R0A0FR PIRIPIOIVB l/)es.icnce& r.lioio,r tssu


5/36

1THE FI]N I)AIlI I,]N'I'AI,IST TIItrIST:RICIIARI) I) 'IVI


6/36

DR. tRAllClS t0tlllls 0l{]iiI IAl{GUAGT OfGOD

hlmseLf ofd slophenHovklng be]leve in God ln

ihtulioi beLlek vilh hn

l$ld resulo.ly or 8e{e eyUnive6iry, Co ilornio.

GOD,THTUNIWRSIAIID $TRNHINC

vd09(YTZXekA&{oohIe

A'rhur t. Ckrke, fomedphysi{d Slepher Hoekinqmd s(ienlirl (or Sogon

SURfTl1I!STIPHIN liAl1/I{IllC,

Tl]T BIG EAllG A|lD GOO

bishons.hlml

lllio kr obo!r hov lhe

.)THE BR]DGtr-BUILDING DtrLIE\'ER:FRANCTS COLLINS

of his daushter.OTHER SCIENTISTS IN 'THIS CATI]CORY/Potish cosmolosisi md Roman Catholic prie$ MichalHcller, British pariicle theolosian and physicisil'*".-'*i.*l

GOD IS lN fHE DETAILS/ Unlike the siaunchdefeDders offaiih, rhe bidge building believer makesovert attempts to reach out to their most\ agnosticpeers in the scientific cotlmunity. While they areequally adamant lhat their identity is grouDded intheir{aith, they are keen to cxPoundto audicncesftom both tbe relisious as well as scieDtific fields thepossibility of a Third way. They arsue that it isnisleading to define the debate beiNeen Reason andFaith as a dicholomy: one can use Reason to trncoverrhe unilerse's secrets because laith is founded onboth Cod siveD Reason as well as Cod odaniedRevelation. Science is Man's nost reliable way ofunderstanding the natural world but is Powerless toanswer queslions on neaning and Pu.pose ofthcha) lrp ndlLral hold surk'. Bioln$ .an "^plrrrhor! human beings fall in love but not $'hy and whatfor. Dr. Fralris Conins is thc most prominent empleof such a scieDtist lnown for his $ork on tle HunanLFlornr P ojF.r. Fenr 'leborF wir\ tu"hdd Daqt in.iD TIME magazine and recently released book,me Lonsuage oJ God, detailing his coNemion fronralheism ard subsequent crisis ol laith after the rape

4THB SOUl,'SLqRCFIINC AGNOSTIC:CARL SAGAN

\|/HO'S OUT TllERll?/ Not comtortable wiili thesomeiimes belligerent corne. that athcists paintthenselves into, many scientists cboose the norepolitically safe path of asDosticismr a cynic whobelieles ii is intelectuallv arrosant to proclain eitherth.tt there is absolutely no God orthat ihere was aspecific Cod to believe in. The agDostic scieniistsusually advocaic staying open to the fact that therenay be a Highcr Poreer, a Creator or a Morelnteiligent Forcc beyond mere hunun beings bnrihey $'ill not posit who or what that is utltil they havcnorc prool Manyphysicists believe in a "sod'tlalis more of an abstract principle of order and harmonyed a set ofmatliematical equatiotis or physi@l la$'srather than a God sith pelsonhood and motivatiotlsThe late paleontolosist Stephcn Jay Goltld arsuedthat science and faith could cocxist because they are.nono!rlapping" domahs ltith no comrnon groundon which to clash, conflicting '!ith scientists likeFranc.is Collins who belicve science and faitli areintertwjned. The late cosmolosist Carl Sagan believedthat a ratioDal, Don'relisious vie$'ol reality wasneeded to solvc orr p.oblens bui Devertheless hestil lioped lor an e\traterrestlial salior to savc usfronl teclinologicat adolescence.OTI{ER SCIENTISfS IN THIS CATEGORY/Cosmologist Stephen HawkiDg, secular humanist andbiologisl E.O. wilson (t

04 BloADlR DtRSlttTlVts tht "ip t.pt trliri.,t i..uP


7/36

5'I'II Ii SI'IRJ'I'U,\L SCIEN1 IST:I:IU T'JoF C,\PIL,\

l'

Fact or Fiction?Pcoplc actually worship aFlying Spaghetti Monstcr!

I'R TI Ii. BTTI' \O I' IN TIItr I\i\Y 11)L THINI{.,\l$ kno$n rs ih. Spag|cdcilv, th. F\'i.A SDushlllll .,.' r-,--"r .l.".r- 'r ''-,.i,r'ol Past.frrji.is.r. N. s!ch .rlli!ial religion eists ofcorrse lt was tlLe purelr srtirical bunrchil.l ofurenploled engiDeer lobll lltndcND. i{ho crcrt.dit iD 2oo5 to makc nDck.r,a of nraiDst|c.nr thcistj.religions. Hisbonc ofcontcntioD rlas wit]r th. i(rns.s.l I,. , ldr.rr,, -,,lF.,i,, , ,J , -s.hools to tca.h th. throi! ol j.telligert lesiEn {1.D.). r'1,,l. , l. r,.. f .,'1,,.llernlebon teLt LD. $.{s psrudoscicncc andproicstc(lagairNt the notion ofrn jnt.lligcDt Crcator. Hc argncdtliat f!ith-bascd rssu!rftions Ucrc .li.nlous rs lhercould Dot bc rcfutcd logicrllv: tlt Oe.1or (ould beaDlthjDg nnrginabl. {ere. somelLi,rs as.idicuLous rsint.lligenl pislu) ns Lo.g as he chime.L to be its''tJro!het"!ossessirigrsetof iuc'futablc holr'books.J leude$on elen \!ent as fr a-q to crcatc his o$r tarod!''gosjrel' depictiig a hcr\cn fillcd \it| stilD.rs rnd,old htsc s \!.ll .s l,is ilr.rn,rir. r. rl,p |prCoDnnandmcnts thc Eight l.l t.lhd You l)id. ls.SiI..1h.n, dre lo e\fosure nr nLlnisteaDr as $'rll asne{ rredia,lhe l:l Dg Spagliettj }'l{msto has bccemca part o{ popular c ltuc. bccoming thc falonrcdsrmbol bI athcists and lgnostics cv.rl1vhcr.1br l|.'.. iI rl r'.l r',9,rl.l'. ,. |.1 .ii i,gcner!]. Oldcr inc nrtioDs oJ lhe Spaghedeitt llrtls.n.d . si.)ilrr saljriral purpose iDcltr.le lertrandI{L,ssell s r 952 spinnirig celestial te!pot and thc 19e( ^ID\isit,le Pink UtricoDi crcatcd bv thc lltcrD.tDewsAroup alt.athcjsn. 6 i

ll Il. UNIyURS]] IS,\ fIYSTDRY/ S.brtisrs Nlioirll in this crtcgoN rrc rcgardcd .s wild.a s thnlLrelong neithcrthc Scicncc"Dor"R.ligion crtupThet hale bceD perftired ^s hcrcti.s b\ alheists,rgnostics xnd bcliclos .lilt. bcc.!se lher a.e so"r.'l r" \'.,.',, 1 u, .,,-ibch.fs. Th.r uele. lo disasso(iate thernsel!es liomb.iDghbell{alas reLigious" be(arseoltlie;.listrstcfor "instilulionrlised religio! !arliculrr\' thrAbrrhr.ric Iajlhs. lhe! preler to crll theDlselvcs''sfirll!!l or ere. pa.adoiicrlh spi tual {theist'r,.1."l.lasle r or New \e religioDs thrt rrc Dot focuscd onllie concept ofr personrl (l(trIor thc Dc.id to tblloNcet1ain noml!recpts. Thc most frnrons cxanrtlc olmcli r scientist is,\mericNn fh!sicist FritiolC.fr.1.,.\r..r fl /-. trt.!-\..,rr',9..r,i,t ..aDd netaphlsics ilonld cv.ntLrau lc.d t., th. srlnrknowle.Lgc. ,\noth.r rcc.Dt conhovcrsiil scienlisl ol'this cat.gon isSan Hards$'|o]ris gain.{1a lbrlunerrritiDg stfidcntlt atIcist boolis like /-.,rr(, lo da-ltBtnn lrart., \!hi.hso re s( lei,l ists lkle cdticisedfor bcing mere rehlrles ol Hrr.is o\!n persoral''rc1iuior" t hal iirc.rrporrLes Drogrhen Bu.l.Lhist aDdAdraiLa Vedrrtic IIindu spiritualii! i'iihoxtincoriroratiDg the m\th and pcrstitioD t|at ofte.accompaDics nrcditatioDal pra.tn. iD lhe reliAious() rHtR scm\t tsl s I\ 1 t IIS c |t Ir,GORl,lN.nr.s.icn.. a..de ic airll N.ile. Sam Ilanis 5,r

05 Ell0ADIR PtRSPttTyt5 r/rr s.i.rr.r & rfliqi.)n irrr.


8/36

i,! 0ll Tlll lrR -ll

06 BR0ADtR PlR5PtflVtS rrr sl'i,Jt.r & rrli,/n,, iss!r


9/36

tselbre the Ei.stein Podolsky Rosen thoughtexpe.imcnt and Bell's Theorem blew ourrnhds aboutthe prcsnce ol a creativc po$'er beyond our threedirnensional matrices oftime. space aDd maiter. Belbrethe reality of cloDing and inter-spccies geneticenilineering caused us to dissect our collectiveconscience to qucstion lhe ever bluring line betweeDprogress aDd regrcss. Beforc Religion got sophisticatcdDoughtonunageitspublicimageanddebu*pointbrDoint iD systematic - cven scientific - fashion allthc \rays she had bccn so nisuDdersrood b) usTorp-n.. B, .urp S.t pmL4r j .nF \. Jr t., nd1 :cdsis and the shc$ mu ndane heartbreal thar co[esLoml.\r,.d-, lo,la, inr. l- \'nid Lu\-,r. nsea.ch of Dreaning, pu.posc and a philosophical

LET THII(tr BE ENLIGH IIjNMENT/ II rhe l5thto 171h centlrln,,Icws, Catholics aDd Protesrants ,each group crlling on the narne of cod tore a bloodyswathe through Europe th.ough a conbinatjon ofpolitical coul1 irtrigues and ourr.ighr religious warsagainst each other.It left bc|ird a contirent wcaryofGod and wary-of those i{ho chnnedto know Hin.It s'as a perfect set-up for the bi.th ofthc 18th centuryage of Enlishtenmcnt which proclanncd scientificreasoD as an altcrnatiye \raI ofunderstanding tlie

Sadly, the 2rst cent!ry' offeN distubingh sinrilardisdanr rciision: Hindu fundamentalistson the ighicousDess ofr castc systen that

penalises the poserless to live out generarions ofdestitrtioD; Buddhist monks who live clandesthelives of rnaierialistic aDCt scxDal excess behnid asercDelr- saf.on fagadei Catholic priests wlio wantonl)ignorc their vows ofcclibacy and chastity to gropeI, i-to In , ,. rBA cl r.t dn r.'n;,l. .sh^.1 inrsalvaLion b1 cod's smce but prcach hell and bdmstoneon hornose\uals and liberals. The reality and honorof reiisious hwocrisy is plain enough for anyone to

on bool{shelves liavc been assailed too by a recenronslaughtof bookswittenblscientists,be.ringthestandnrdof atheism. "heGodrelusionbybiolc,gistRicha.d Dawkins, Tie ,n.1 o/Fdtrft by neu roscjeDtistSani Harris and God: the Failed Hupothesis b.\p\)^ .F v' o. Srrr'r' .\n rrd 1ei, F..:b, 1 ,lflJrolcall liom?lie lJei, ro?*

"intesbesL selliDg list to rcsjst

thc temptation to faith aDd fatuous tlinking. To t|esestalwart atlieists, little rcason exists to call ofT its/oturd on all thinss reliitious. RelisioD to them is anabsurd, aDachronislic brst: at bcst, nrerely coniicali1ir. idr.Ll^r . .n.;.r-I. , u h.rnrart rt: \ utrtFr-religions texts; at rvo6t, completely gr.rtesque in theserics ofmonstrors nisdccds carried outniiis Datr,eby its rnost ignoble d.lorees.TH E ATI ILIST S CO\ I N DRUM/ ftp tuF,liorthat frrstmtcs atheist scjentjsts thc rnosl is this:whyis it tliat despite centuies i)fcducation, technologicalp.ogr.ss and (he rise of alicmati! systems of thoug|r,relision remajDs alile and $ll loday?

fttaltDl,!tt5Y0UNGsOUl0nhi5M vr. Pf SS|[llsl,iPAST s. tUTURtHISTORY

Yl]UTUBfIll]I

POIl{]NGHORNIONs0FNtt&Rt ct0tlWCZE A

IX(IRPT5 IROM R IHARDDAW( IIS'11]I GOD DTLUS]ON

3klz|lXPs&leolure*lohd

d (qreet virh hlm

iL]D TH !F"qTND.F-E6*@r'trT}]fINDOfRIASONRerd (llri'rion rheoloqlrn

0/ AR0iDR PERtPitilVtS i^. s.iin.c & relisl:on nsre


10/36

FEATURI ARTI(Lt

After all, logically spcakins l]s DasdinJhypothcsis goes ihe smarte. and more, dvi n.ed maDLiDd becomcs. and the morcnass Nedia awakens us to thehpoc.isiesofreligir,us delotees, the natural outcorne$'ill be to enbracc scierce and/or atlieisni.Cudously, the nurnbers of conle'ts tontheism in the ilo d has not dramaticallyrisen with the changjng times. hstead. it is.eLigion nost p.omin.ntly the elerpresent Abrahanic.eLiitions of Judaisnr.ChristianiLy and Islam as well as thc al$'aysftshbnable Eastctr .eligions that lusgro$r by eDviable lcaps and boundstogethcr xitli liodemisation.In 1916, rescarclie.James Iuba found only4(l% of scientists believed in God. DevoutL)athcist, he predictcd too that atheisrn $ouldspread as educationbccame more accessiblealld socicrr- more sofhisticated. tsul aftcr acentury of great change, in 1997, histodansLarson and Witham replicate.i Leuba ssurvey only to discover lhat thc depth ol'rcligious hith arnoDg scientisis had notbudscd - 40% ofscieniists still agreed thatGod aDd an afterlife exists- Moreovr, theresearch fouDd that mathematicians wrenost inclined to believe in God whilebiologists, physicisrs and astronomerstended to have the lighest rate of disbelietThis findins .eveals that orthodo\ relisiotlis no rnore disappcaring among tlieiDtellectual elite thar it is amoDgthepublic

One ar.esting rcasoD for why atheisn hisnot caught the nnagination ofnrorc People

scientjsts or otleNrisc - $'as oneredby a2oo7 I4rIRltI) niagazinc articLe bt.' GaNWoll. Evcn to aD ngnostic like Wolf, it isdifficult for atheists lo sell their ideas aslols as Lhe.y sound so openly con.tescendinsof the 90% of thc rvorkl Lhat bclieves jnreligioD in some form or other. wolfconcludcs that "exlremisn in oppositiontoexlremism is too uch'. Sadly, sornc ofscience\ mostprominentatheists arejustas oppressilc, self-righleous ard rcpulsivelydogrnatic as rel igion's $'orstlundanentalists. Even scientists $'honttellectu \ side wiih the lie\rs of ath.isn!uncomfortable with i|c toDe ofnoral andintellectual righieousDcss, are quick todivorce thcmselves |rom the likes of

Dawkins and IIa is. pleading lor a 'noreconciliatorydebate. 1o \Voll atheist scieDccis a lost cause politically and culturallybecause it carcs less rboutfixingtheworld sprcblenis and more .ibotrl being right rboutthcir pafi icular doctrine of sciencc.Clearlt many modem scientists seeno contradiction between a questto understand nature andsupernature. TheY accePt thepossibility of a deity that existsoutside of our testable reality ofspace, trme and matter - essentiallybeyond science's ability to fullyassess. To them, truth can come tolight thrcugh both scientific enquiryand divine revelation. Thc Diaiest),elcgance and jntdcacyofthe outersPace ofrhc universe and nrner space of hrunrnbenrgs is testimony eDough that everythinghas bccn inteLLigentlt' created by someSuprene force rather t|an thro$'n iogethcrby pure chance. lor instaDce. il thegravitational constant were off br-' oDe partin i hnndre.lmillion million. thc univemecould not hrre evanded after the Big B{ngin a i{ay th{t would allow life to octur. E!nthe prescDce ofa sophisiicated concept of

conscience and lnoraliiy tlithin humaDbeinits is sceD as a plausible sisDpost ofadivire \a,ill driving the c|eation process.THl], RI.]CENT PtrACE PROCtrSS/I'lodcrn science has scttled into a knrd ofdtentc i{ith its formcr eDeny becauscrnoderaics on both sidcs have laid doi{Dtheir arms and began a peace processAlthough rhc Cathoiic Church has beenrcundly criticised fo. its forbiddhs olconiraceptive use aDd its adamaDt standagainsisten ceLl rcsearch,someof itsmostpowe Lll scientific cdtics who o e. bothpraclical sohtions and intcllectual deb.ieare fc,und withnl the Church itselt ln 1992and 2ooo, t|e late PopeJohn Paul II issueda fom l apolos, for all th histoical errorsof thc Church inc.lndiDs the Calileo atrair.ljnionologist lldward O. Wilson's'the Credtion: An Appeal ta Sate Lilb ot1&rrrr appcals to believeN ard Dotl-beiie'e'5to unite lbrthe sake oltheplanet. Thougha sceptic ol religion, he argucs that blieliD God is a product ofevoluLion and thus,should not be re.jccted o. dismissed,bul further inresLigatcd by sciencc tobetter understaDd lhcir significnnce to

Therehas been a well-pu bliciscd su.se toc)jn thc nunber of "cvaDgelist scicntists'like Dr. Francis ColliDs ard Dr. ZashloulLl Naggar who have won the rcspecl of boththeir scientific and .elisious cortenporariesbecause of thejr intelleciual ardscriduraliDtegrity. Reconciliation of thei beliefscomes from their position on theinterpretation of rligious torts: not everypassase should be taken literally especialy\rhen ihe saiptures arc in the fonn of poebyor songs rather than instructioD or history 'In or her words. what were memt to be readas meiaphols aDd synbols should not beread as absolute fact. lhev are quick b pointout discrepancies iD tlie belicfs oflLrndamentalists on both sides. l]ven hard-nosed atheist Richard Dawkins lrasgrudgingly admilted to respecliI)S thcsciertilic kno$'ledge (if not the religioushclinarjc,ns) of esteemed British prrticlephysicist xnd ChrisiiaD fieologian RocrendDr. JohD PolkinshoDe.j ,ri,-",| ,ltn?r3llr (rtn,r/ /'t.nr/r drr,,lttiI d,fi.rt,lld!,/!srn'hirr.r./rn!,r'1,r.

08 BCOrDlq Dt\0trTtF t] .. i, .t. .\ t 1t.1. .t, i . t.


11/36

xl!ch lilie Ll)e laliled !rodigalsoD. Scicncrhrs been irreiistil)lr drr$.n ha!]i n) its oldhomr rnd hcarth. Fcw of t.dar's Iouthsrajscd on dclibcratcly in.ligious nrodeDedLrcation slsterns i.e arva.e ol tle histotol sc;erce lhat clearl) sho$, ho$. Reliiiiorlfathered Science. Thc,\brrhrnic lrithsJtrdaism, Chrislirnitt and Ishlr rllr.llocat. thr sccknrg oflno$lcdgc rnd tb..x.min.tion ol rilrtr. fir.lL,.s o1 . di\ i.eCr.rlor. lh.\ b.Li\e lhrl Cod (nf lrehorourel lh.ough the respectful andrjgourous ust of thc mird or tof of tIchcrri.Dd stirit. Ifunr ClrristiNns indCrtholics llid do\!n k.Itl..ri.s.l nr.dc lthvsi{'s,..|.nristr', nr.dl.inc, rni Lrerralic!rrl ge.elics: Gies,)r Aje,r!lel. ReneDeicades, Ilirluel l:aradur. Bhisc 1'ascrl.Robtrt Bovl., Louis hsi.!r.II!\ lhDrk.Ihvrs rlsoth... lNInsli.r ibi.k.rs $h.grrLr tlr. hr,rld rh..onrtJi ol /ero. lhesrslenr ol rlg.b,r, lIe rtodeu i,ui,rberiuil\stelr arnl hid llle guNnl\rork for nodcrnDlediclie as $.ell {s rhoristf . J st a l.xrliat mrthcDiaticxl and s.i.rntifr. lcxi.o.Nr.ls llris l..l: rlg. 1h.r, rlgebri. !Ll,tli..L.h.ni\ rlL b..rr llie p.ell\ ol rl slort1o.,r lor tlie Aulric 1!orl ,\lhh lcod).S llrrising]l. cvcD rtircirD s trvoxlit. oidintcll(lurl malrlTs Cj.lil.o Crlil.i rn.l(lhr es lh vi. re\ e, \ei,t rLS lir$ Lo doulnthe erisleDCe oi cod. calileo reDrrnrcd rdevout Crlholic dt-.titt bting unfxirlvhbellcd bl thc crtholic Inquisrti r rs r|cr.tic fd tushingIr hll)ot|.sis r]rri r|.slLn \!.s rhc.cnrr. oi lh. solar s!!Leirr rfdr'ol llanh as ltre Catl,oli( Cli!r(h lrelie!ed.DrNin hnristlfilas coDriDccd tliat (l(trll$thr Firn Cmsc of thc uDnarsc His ll !i!rifrom Ch]istirDil, to!!rds rgnosti.isnr i!.sn.t |Nrus. of Iis dis.or.ries .borL!\'.Irtion brLl b..,ius. hF (o!l!1 irol coi!e t!le rs $ilh the deall olhis daughter]\lnie.]t ${s ! crisi-\ of frith iD thr bcncvolcncc ofGod utlrcr thrn thc.\istc..c ol Cod.s()ltlt'r'NlElzscHt., (;( )l' ts (NO t)l)l,rAl)/ So {h\ else does G!d renrindelirrnlr rlne ur iD aije ofscience:r lt hrDsout thc otrlt gods thrt lrr{l .licd el.Dg tlrcwi] to nrxldrlisrtion ivo. Z.ns. Rr. (ldinr.d SIn \\rL Korg: l)iL.LIeorrs o1 g!dss1..r irs liof' liLl rell{1.)!b b!sed !oi orlhe riso! r o1 s(trL! rrl do(unetrtation rndexrnLituti!n l t on the lugaics ol orllh

frsscddoiu tr$titi..s.nd natn. lor..Th. tuit]rs th.t br!. .n.ld|cd .lkl so t)i,JlLlb..rLisi, llieir loLkN\a irrlLidriousL\ mrdesui e llielr s(ri!lu.es surrired the iourne\oJ tine, iDtelledurl !fhc{\'al rnd soc!)political chaDgc: th. Buddhist Trifitrk^.tlrc H|rdn Vcdrs, tlr. J.wish l i.rltll. lh.Ciristirn Bibl. rnd rhe Ish i{ Kortir|..f1. l,)\e,l their relisi.)rs !asiionrtelveroustr to pksen e thern rl all costs. Tod.Ll,Lhe io ner Soviet strtes ste {florL Shnrgofrclignm !nd !n a])rDdoDnrcnt olrt|.isnlr stit. of!.rN ol bknd\ elb,1 Lo,e0r.rss

l)eslite lhe cullLrrrli{rN Lreingfought otrthe ierchilg of.rcrtidrism rDd iDtclluturldcsigD in.\!rc .an nhools. Drsr lnard. indr cnd \..1 lo.c( !r)\ 1le frlddle qn,rd,desirlng Liollr {ien(e rnl religlD m theirll\es. Iew $rtrt to bc tiihrr Lxdditc oratheist for r good rcailr. E cnnodllo!.sthc conlcDi.ncc of t..I.olog!. Bn1sirnult.n.onslL in!oD. \'ho hiLs xrertlrd\ ilh r ., rsliirg corirfulr or o urkv toasleroren lnLows this simtle truth: tlic liagilit!a!d iDefficicDct of hum!n nradctcdnDlogics and slstons do Dot i.s|ir.lbsolut. contidcn.c. \\ir oblioL,sl\ ]1r\.lrorLbl. r!1,i.g relrll!el\ slrrulel.cltr!toSi(,s Norli, rDd clen nrore tr)ublc$ith DraDrging $'hcrc our ngli.st hnmrDimfuls.s Nrnt to t.kc us. ADd tl. nror.scicn..r fus]r.s .rr 1u.hn.logi..l.,Lrrdrri.s, lh. .rore lrjali lcl ir{l\dlr.,gdrl 0alhs, lile tltering lecisioN ardaltetruU\ e fLrtures il opeDs up tor ns. lciDgessenti!lll rnoral. Scicncc crnnot rDdnillnott.llnshowtoch.os.orivhrl 1..hoose.Onl] Rrligio. Innid.s us,!ad rrrr)s Lonrrig.lr tole.LiaLLr Iixustirr brrg!ir)sI hro!sl, (leliuetLiDg clear perirnetc'rs of dglit

IIIR()SHIIIA S LTCACY/ lh., .rsesl,,,1r o1 lio$ \re.,aIrEel !urlearLe(ltn,)logr' \Li!ul.l gi!e us enough reasonr! to $h) \'e reed rtliijbn in r scicDtificalhaclr{nctd n)ci.t1. Phlsicists \Lho wo*.dontlcfirst xtomicbomb nr thc \lrnhrlta.Proj..trr.r.d..fl\'nro ill.d br lhr le(jlJlehu ar' cod !.rid llirlsliiruald Nagasrliilor tLeir $orli. Norse. their ir!.nti(r l.dto lhe (reation oftht nuchar aNrs rdcc rndrD orarpoi{.furg $sc ol fo]itnll tr.rnoirtl t t.rsists to t|is dr!.I'blsi.isi F,..mrnBR0,\DtRPtllPlOVt5 /rrn.ir!1tr(t rriir/r,r issrc

l)1s.. l.l.i, srid. "lll.,..!,,r tl,al (tl)eb,)n'b) $as d,opped \as j!st tl,rt ,roLod!hnl the rou[Se or lhe foresight to sr! no.11r blanrct techrical aDogxncc and th.illusnD ofsod likc lmiv.r tbr olcBvb.lnr i.sti..o.rnro. s. ns. .l lh. srieflilir(omm!ritv. Free of the ethicalframework laid dorvn by ourrcligious beliel.s, science $,ill insteadbe dfiven byour habits, our politics,our selfish inclinations, ourecoDomic systems and ourcolnpetitive d ve to know. Whatwill be the eqnivalcnt oflliroshima1br the 2tst centuly now that ourtechnologies have become lar morefrightcning, [oreign and groul,IclbreakiDlt? lhe possible (Le(nnltnD ofourb sphcrc l! nxnotcdrnologl ru! rmol?Th. cr.rti(D ofr lnrdcm crstc srst.m $itbrs t..t.rirg or t.f an.l r nriss ol ll rsl,nlel,n+.llio,Ls i,1iici.L l.l.illise.L belrAs at LLelr!tlorn:' llre djl!tion ol !rr Setretic pooibe!!usc of x ncontriD cd grncticcnginrcring? Thc.rcrtion of bh.k h.l.st]ulks to.n atom rsld gon. r\ il'?l HI,l ltOAl) Ll.lSS l ROl)l)lili/ XI{nIdeo llo$ Religion futs Science on ashol1lcrsh. hniting scicntifi. crtloratioD .ndtl!s hum.n frogrcss. B!t thti q,,esljors1hl tt.ligion D.ses N,e nece\srrr rrd c!1Lo llre lrearl: llt)to trrrlt ntQt hunrDlLtul)lrtllta orl n1ar. i( lrlg.fss do u.rt\l|u tlttd ta.hx t11.! lttr'\d? O l,ris th.onstr.r lt. iD n1Ltl1 nn,a'fun.loDtn1nlrrrr!rrstD D/ /,r,i,.r,r /rc(ttt at u)ill? Li,(hat t.tl da rrr fi,rir. oll 1/r.s.n\:lIr)laqit\ ruotsl V11! do r\i tl. thelhirqs /idi u,do.')Tne. $.. n sthonourou go.L-girtD irltrcDt hrunrD curiosit!.1rhL. frc.dom ol inf.r.rrtion r.ir.li.oNl.dg. th. criffli.g elle( t ol !!lli|gtoo,r rl restrictioDi oD the pursuit ofhrowledge. lut rs ThoretN onc slnL:ncwill be 'rirh in frofortnr t{) thc nrmln'ol thilgs rrc cln rflor(i to lct .lonc.'\Vc Drust dis.cnr rrt k..\lodge ir lood.rdsercus 1o r!A!e und rhi(h rords arebesl left urtrodden. \\'e need noi riskelrtthing that is noblcn xn.l bcst nr tlrisworldfor thc sakc olfrrfit orJrst oD. mor.f.ck ilto laDdora s box. T|. Ih.h.rL1.r.Pro;ecl s ph\sicisls will teslih to that.l,

09


12/36

rJt\t tN!l lllxll"l6lil

"l

A80UI Illt rr TtR

0 8PO{D[P DrR P.L r- / '


13/36

WAITli Tt] 5

ffit ftrtY:l]OW DOtS TTII]|lOIOGYtv0wt? K[ wt DtD.tdky'\1e /id/tetxe(urive tditorolWlRtDmogorne Kvir Ke ly !\ei

vrloe of le(hnolo9y. 8y

(onpiexilyh nu{h iko lhe

Uslnsodhdplinehoppinsexofi(lloro ro $e 8ig Bons,

"Man is omnipotent."MOSTLY I'RUtr. BL]IT NOT IN THE \vAY THAT$rtr WANT/ Itk njndbosslins when you rallr thinkabout it. We opentcon brains on a dailybasis, growlifc at will in pehi dishes, pilot nachines that canreach great heights and depths, peek at uDiversesn,ill:ons.r. oillr"ns o lrl"J"1n awa\. r.!olutio.li.eagriculture inelds, and rcad the genetic code that makesup the esseDcc ofhurnan life. Man has been able towield so much pohr and control ove. his envircDnentand ensure his continuance and domiDance sosuccessluly in a hostilel\'orld that it is little wonderhe thinks he is omnipote . Is it very surprising that{F" ".!e.p\\plrp\el}al i i,onh amdll"r ot .im-J|d nni' \ hniorp ue .oloni,F \pd.e :n\Fr. rirnptralel, resurrectthe near dead from freezers aDd seito live oul olll lives as ghosts ni the niachnre? Scie!rc,Man crows, is rhe sirgle nost powcrtul tool at his

Thc problen is when IIan brandishs power like bolsshowing offtheir nelr tot6. $rhat does ii also say aboutour species that now more than ever, we are able toliil] our fellow mer nio.e efficiently or - dependingon your politics - more painfully on a wider scale,dcl, rn ne t-,e rtFl-'gpn, e dn,l hedlth " uJr brbie.and perhaps their athletic abilities in tuture, not drinktwjce about duplicartug or modifying thc thingswe eat on a dailybasis andbuild larsc scale projects

e,ort\ of the Tower of Babel trusiins carelessly that$'e have techDolosical soluiions to deal with anyervironnental fallout? Whjle not doubtingthe scaleand success of Man s material prosress and theelevation ofgenerations out of tlie stan'ing clasles,such incredible amounts of power exercised on a dailybasis by scientists, engineers, military men andpoliticians should worry us a lot more.Man's omnipotence is dubious and troublins becausesuch power is wielded less rs a benisn ad benvolentforce but more like an amoral 5 year old drowning awhole colony of ants in the gaden. lhis mixhre ofarrogancc, curiosi\,, emotional detachment and.on pell',rg nppd.o \Fa,hjg, ro rh. :'tusjiil, orrir5ro Ican put manldnd at tremendous dsk every tiDe a ne$'technologl, enelges. our collective need io know canrrr.ge irom,\e.r'sJr|,s rhe po.sibiitiF. oiu.inganimals as drus facto es to the norbid fascin.ttiorlwith breeding chjmeras. Any arising corcems arebru.led asid" in rhe nimF olpru;Fss J10 pcnnnnr...or by the complacetrce that Man has ihings undercontrol. This is especially so today since scjentificandtechtlolosical applications arc continually held hostageby corporaie entities more interested in the monetaryand military gains to be made than any vasue orpossible ethical quanda['.

ll Bc0lDtR PfRSPt0lVtS,1,?' i,r ? tr r rlts - r' ;,:ue


14/36

WATihTt]L5

IUAN Il{RIOUTZ:DICOD] GTllIfUTURI

WTH GI]!OMITS

rotks/rleu/id/8a

s{iely, rhe

brouqhr wirh ir rhe ero o{

- brinq us?

ofco,,xethe ans$eis not onethatthe ludditeswo dhavc us embracei ihc cffects ol scieDce ard techDologysprang out ofPandora's box a long tirne ago and jt isreally not very constructi\c trlking about iro$'$ canturn back time. Whal we musi re]l1embl foremost isthat the powcr $'e liave to renuke the world andhumaDkind also changes lhe rclationships ihai wehave $'ith them, nrost times irretrievably. WiI we stjlbe recosnisably hunan decadeslron now or will theassertion ofsuch rawDoNcr mean the eitinction of

Every cutting-edge technology tirat p.omisds t.)relolutioDise the world hs dlso spa$ned r whole hostof ethical dilennts andharmlul side cffects whose.ur:nB l'd\, 'rDUr' o..i.in I ol ,d r4d u\ Tli\ i.bccause our asccndanc) in this world has blinkeredus:rve rarelv havc enouqh humilitr or foresigbt io seethe fragility or potcDtial problems ofthe thjngs webujld. For e!e.y scicDtist thai s'oried about thcconsequences of the Manhattan Projcct, tliere aredozens more who rvould kill to be included in tliat

We may have to concede that power is sometimes bestcontained or controlled. ihat sometimes we have todraw a line in the sand and say "no" or say "wait"xlan's power nust bc f!11)'

recognised and tenpered bywisdom and restraint to countas a meaningful force for good.As citizens with voting ghts,we ought to dernand norepublic discussion and refer-'endun on issucs to do with ncwtcchnologies. As lotrg as morcinfonnation is disseninated intothe public spherc, se canbecomc more cognizaDt of ho\tscienlific ard technolosicalprowess is us.d on our behalf.Because legislation st ill

continues to lag behind scientific advancement, wemust insist onluvirg Buidins aDd ethical princiPlesspelt out as breakthroughs in cutting-edge technolog,vtlp IJrro-".hnn,^B\. 'oooli . I, r,c.: Fn8 nq riIJand seDonics to namc a ferv, can comc suddenly uponus. We should not irait too long nor be too blas6because. likc Icarus. we can easill plunge into ahubristic momss of our own makiDs. I t

t2 SR(]ADIRP'R!P-(,Vl( ./r,., r., p.! /.l,ylrr. +\!

I . :3.3''.r--."Man isomniscient."U RI)l,l'/ Upon firstglance, it mayseem an unfajrthingto say. Ho$'can hundrcds ofyea.s ofscienlificdiscovery and man s atiendant increase in knowiedgebe co pletely discounted? From 1 A.D , jt took oneand a half thousand years for information to doubleand reach the high point ofthe Renaissance. Now,experts asree that the snm of all accumulatedknowledse is doubLins evcry ferv yearc or so withinfonnation production SetiiDg fasterand faster, wecan rcliably sav ihat tnan $'ill knoiv evn more as the


15/36

SURI]HS

HODtlPS0 rR080TSTI]IT ARI'SIII,AWART'

lkshiev id/165

Relativib', quantum mechanics, computational theory,cosnitive neuroscience, sFthetic biology, the list -and ii is admittedly an imprcssive list goes on. Morethan ever, nrn has breached the barriers ofisnoranceand mtstery dd reached a state where most scientistsad resedch.s agree that they now know mo.e aboutthe nateial world than any geneEtion before them.Not orly that, at this rate of discovelT, it is practicalya siven thai any gaps in kno$'ledge will defiDitely bc[Ied h sooner rathcrtban ]atr.But does this qDali!'as being all-knowing? OfcouNe,lh..^i'nor \pn\Fidm...iul . thJr Io(a lnr'.rFr,of the universe have been pcnetrated, and that thereare still plenty of quesiions that have yet to beanssered about thc hurnan body or the mtuml $'orld.Other than that, ifweiust look rt our cunnt state ofkDo$'ledgc, the problen is two-fold. Notonlt-are wedroMing in all the infornation $'e lave, ne also donot view it or use it asjrdiciously as we shorld. Manmay hare tremendous amounts of data andinfornatjon at his finilertips blt does it arnount tor- I \r n\.1, d8" ld nrF?nir;: \4Jn s n\F-al ningdesirc to sohyet another scieDtific conundrun hasyct to mean that the arswers will autonaticilly helpu5 u, rFr\lJnJ u.Ii-l\.. Lcrrpr o'rIJr $ wil gJrlthe necessary insight to be better human bcings.whiie tbe search for truth is connne.dable andDcccssary, the probleni also is i'hcn requate nlan'sonrniscience only with scicDtific n.uth. ScieDce $'asoriginally used as atool to xplore the natural {orldbul nu$ i ..'dl,'.nls\ava I l Fn un ! qldr- .ligiou.position - "scientisn that purports to ans\r ALLqucstions about the univeNe and burnan existence.Man's supposed onDiscieDcc is h.oublirg because notonly is lhe vahre ofscieDtific knowledge c.rnipletelyu nquestioDed but jt is also accoinpaniedbya dosmalhat discouDts othq liDes ol jnqujry complctely.Science's insistence on having the monopoly on truthis creating a witch hunt where an]'ihing that does notconform to the ru]es of science is sneered at andhounded oni of exisien.P'llis caD be sccn esDecially in the fractious battle fo.truth bct$'cen science and religjon. Instead of theoFnnss ol lhought that earl)' scieniists had and theiraccommodatins rclationshit lith rcligioD, ironjcallyit h now moden science that is more hostilc top.rssibilities. Thc.c seens 10 be niore ofa complacent

and smug scientific posiiioD today that truth andknolvledge has no space for rclisious or nysticalsobbledyeooL Nobel laurcates nor! sav that "the woildneeds to wake up frcm its long nightmare of relisiousbelief and renoMed scientists assert ihat religiouseducatioDis buinrrashing ' and tantamount to child

While not thrownu evohtion and the Big Bdg theor]and tne laws ofphysics over for an insistencc thatscierce classcs onl)' teach intelligent desisn (proposedb) equallr closed and dognatic relisious individuais),na]'bc we need to admit that nan Gnnot be lruly all,knowing if rre shtrt down different routes townrdslinding answers aDd neaning. Opiimisticatiy thereare cerlajD organisations and scientists who take lesspolaisins positions in the search for truth. Thep.estigious Templeton Prize awards granrs tocncourage discc,verv oD the bis questions in scienceard thiio.opn\. surlp..i.nrisli\t"r4 h4:f li p In rgto reconcile the kDowable dinensions of scieDce withthe unknowables of religioD and cod, and otherssearch for why beljefin God exists.

Finding the God pafticle or provingthe authenticity of the Shroud ofTurin does not make man

Robokii tiplon demmnmres! le\{ ol his ool ift,obors,whi{h hove rhs obtliry roleorr, unde6hnrl,hemielvgofd even re l.rep kote.Arlheroo of thr umonny demo so deep inqLriryinrorhe mi!ruol hov huoioDi ond livinslrow ve nlghr homss thsepmielses,o m!ks $ nssrhot

omniscient. Maybe the answerdoes not have to do with having toknow the answers to every,thing.Human beings need meaninglife; there isn't always a needtake that away from them just toprove thal whai they believe isflawed or cannot possibly exist.

tnto

A higher and deeper kno$'ledse of tnth cones fronbeing oper to wonder and possibjlitl . The story of theuniverse, $hether you are coning from anevohtiona{' or religious point of view, can be equallyglo olts and awe inspning-ft

l' BR0A0[R PtR(PrrV6 rh. 5rirn ra /.t,oro",s\1.


16/36

ESSAY MAN{EO\IER

Aitunv rriith n4ts.llrHorocRtrDn/LP.rrl littn.h.nk.t.alic&ro!drtL.alortt.ns

rlE1]UTTIt IlIITIl('lt rg |c. rcnlenth.rsth. i ndiat na t io I h e.f.ltu/r., negor liisli/sr /lli,r d srd! l. urokIlc /r.s stru lrr,?il l/rorsrp?L4!.!s r!rt,is/rd.tsnoL 1ak..far qaotlrssdrs o,d rndl /rcsh.uld lisl., t. i/i.fc.dbdLk af hi5{ddi.n... n,l /iis!ride.?i ! k.6drtx/n.ltrirt.rtu an.llc0./r.rdrs1:t1oot t)f Thaunht.

A flrll demonstration of horv iuguments should flow lvhileconsidedng content over\riews. By Tong Ycc

ne frustration rve have had in the EssayMakeover sectiot.t is to find the editorial spaceto do a complete makeover of an entire essay.F.edbrrk llom stL enls th.t i{e haYe don. a mrkeoverfor so 1ar liasbccn posiUre bnt n'e rlso coDsisieDtlv re.eivc iuelitrble q cstiiDs onho!v to correcl thc other lrragrtPhs that l'e..ot addressed iD our

features. \{lile Dol lbr a hck ofcrfi.itv to do lhis ihcmsehes, sttrdcnts did le'lthat itwas impoftart to see rn cDti.e ess.) btiDs Irrdc ovtr so lh.i corLld sludy rllthc sltills j. lhcir cnti.elr. \'c hale Lhe fc cct e\cuse to do this irr lhis iss eClemcnt carnestlt agrc.d to be our cssrY ttillng Suirer pig.nd sit lor a 9.) ninutesessioD $'heE he rrs giten t sliencc and te(hnolog] qtrestjon io attenlrl i a toPic thathadJUsi rcc.ntl! bee. co\cred in his scnool. We trsk.d Clcnent 1o .pplv rll essal rv'itingskills rs hc undc$tood th.Dr. Upon lhe conpletioI olhis csst\ - N. fiDislie.L 1L sessioDby asking aboni his expel ien.c and gol hirD n) exPhin his kcv slNgSlcs nliile {riling

cleDeDt lilt ihat lLe hrd doDe adequrtcl] ell a ll.r thc e{reriencc, |irnarilr lion thefact tllal hc had prodLl.cd 7 conL!lete paragraphs oD a toPic he did Dot hare muchcoDfidence in. As hc was taught, therc {as c\id.nce ol a rgtrmcDt starl ing $ith Pa.xg'alhsihat supported |is strnd ard laicrthe co.sidcratioD rnd dcbatirg oi balancfig ideaslle rccogdzed holvclcrtlxrt he wrs lost iI |is osrr argumenl midj{rvlhurg| thepaPer'l1e ilso lb nd il r)ert lo inpossilrl. to gtnerale .Dough extnrll.s thlt \!ould vali.latecrch point |c i{rs Lrr' i.gto uise. Ne will be add ressing tliese iss cs !s \!ell as nchnrgto supplenr.nt ClonerI s fonrts with lhc tight errmln.s lic reeds.

The Macro Makeover

l4 ER0ADtR PtRSPttTlVtS i/L s.l,,.r & rfli(/n,i rsrr.


17/36

XIor. importaDth, $'e Jell that Clement did not posscss a mrc.o oye^ ie$,ofthe topic. $rcftrd that dris qualit) Oraks a huiie.titrcrcncc in anvsnrdeoL s suipt, remltilg jD stroDgcrflows iD aryu.rent ard nuch nnrrc convincilg staids thaL .e rlt iI stroDg conchrsions.lvitho!L tlis rlacro \iei! of thc issuc at hand. iL js entirel) possible to slythnrgs that soundnaive and sinplisiic. Noi suruisinitl!. alter being enlightcncd I'idr .n understanding oftodar"s global sccni o in sciertillc developnent. Cl.nrcnt read his essa! again \!ith Do!elcs and agreed lhal he Nould liare changcd his stand a.d poirts had he knoi{n this

We sLa.t therefore nitlr this nronr]r s question rDd a m{cro olcnic$'ofwhat'!e shouldlirst understand about scicnce a.d tchnolo&r tdar. Follo\ing th.t, read ourcomlientson each ofClcm.ni s pamgftphs and sec'r.hcthcr you fiDd his pamg.aphs convincins. wcthcn finish oll Lhis week s niakeovcr ryith paragraphs reu'.itten and rggested poirxs that\otrld |are nade llis essavbctto.I\'IA(]RO O\:I'RVIL'IV/>/azt inzenlic>ns anJ Ascaveies ate uSeJ ;sn..l lhe concurn o{ l/te 5c;ehl;sl.Do yozz a3ru"7This cssa! .annot be wriL t! {ithout rD axrrcDcss of thc co Dl ruveN} tlht rcunds rcccntdclclotrnents in science aDd technobs, today.nd l}e i.rplications it hrs oD a scicntist srcsfonsibility Lo liis connnuDitv, aDd .vdr hu al]il). CleineDt coukl not lossjbly Ialeclaincl thrt he kn.i{ not|ing aboul nuclear techDology, biot.chnology or artiliciaLnltelligeDcc, cvcD if|e.oL,ld claj.L thrt he has nclcr hcrrd ofnrDotechnolos\, the PuJrilashConfcrcnccs or conrf anies lilie NonsaDto.Th. foinl is thaL o!. delelopments in scicn.c today open u! possibilities ofunfrcccdcntcdtechdological rpplicrti{ms tlut co ld ver_\ well colLpronise hunuD s.ctri1l and saDctity.'1he idea that scientists n.c.l nol tal,e rcsponsibilitv nav have bccn a notion espoused Nheni{e $'erc still dc.ling wjlli penicides, dmaDritc or antibiotics (a.d even then it $'ascontrolcrsill). Bul these drvs, with t.chnologicrl iD.olaLjo lropelled by fice markctdcmrn.l, scienlillc progress coDuctitilcly nrarking lhe !.oBress ofa nrtion, jDtcmatioDalinslitL,ljons too werkto bdDgglobal consensus o. deyelopmerts and ftrDding for contmveNialrcsearch nore easih xttanrcd, tlt Dren standirg h the n dlc ol all this nrdeed ha\ aDioral responsibiliB to be al leasL coDcened ifDot liablc.Th. onlyh'at we can a.gue thatscieDtists shonkl no( be concene.l is to rcccpt thc factt|at apath! mar be the oDlv wav ascicntisl can (o!e wjth thc vast changcs nis work is brinsirs to thc human racc.

15 BROA0IR Pt[sPt(Ivt5 l/t sr(,r'. & r.liqor issl.]


18/36

E5sAY MAltEO\lIR

I5T PARAGRAP|| rhc most imlortantihing to do in irtroductions is to divestraight into the key issle behind thequestion. ln this case rhe }ey issue is inthe contD!Ar $1r I screnhsh har e to t&e fresfon< hilrty ur bc (once,ned $,th Ideve oDnrents that h. rr proneenna Lhe Ierrminer istrdlj as&cofth*eN 5dd Ic\Dects \ou to lat out the iscDe in boti IileDth ud scope in your introdnction. IClneni ho$tver, beAins with larslyseneric infomation about globalisation,bnich contflbxte\ ven lirrle to buildrngconndence that lc cctucll\ kno$s the Lissue. He then Iollows $irh a \asue Iehbodtinn ofthe asuF a nd c d ktu lbi;sh Isrmplisti.stand,.unsdcrinEthe.nntent Iove'viewle Yrla red I

II

2ND PAMGMP|| A"dnoDeuins n"int-eerpe(t ethe, fotrnLlat,oncl lbasic but trmDortantl cupnortior your staod to bi.rr.dDcd or the $e ot one of vou. Istonqestoointstobes,nto.on{..e;.ut Iauihence to draNthm,n.This is where Isc must emnhds, tlc rmlo afce ot Ima(ro knowieds oi tie rssue ln itselt Ithere is nothins c\sntrallv wofs kith Ithe loa c that clement dscs in tl,is Iparaa.cnh hut wrthout rdqtratt Iunilerstcndineof rutrentdeveloDments, Ipo,nts will h; madc out ol (onre\t and IaDoccr trivial. The useofthe d\manritepiample illustrates this idea $ell. ID\namire ss nJtentcd rn rBbT Clement I,sqrtine Jn ssal brsPd on issuesin the I\car 2oo8. Clement could h^e at least Ithouaht c lirrle nroft (r4r yecrs aheadl Ianil rechsed that his Dornt was o\er\ |sLmplistic rnd madetora bad start. I

cLtrMUNI"S ESSAY/

^.);th J/oL|;2t,1;-., 1lr/ hds ltu4ht al-'.r ;fttuas"d .lrt1e'*." .t/t t;/;l..1eJ ac.ess l- ea3;et .r|,t aate "tTc'"ht le.hh-/.5/ ,icr-33 th"S/.J",;/ ;3 /;t//e tuahler thal a.ah,,a /1..3 3";z"J the -l/-t 1z1h;ty tal".t"t th"; /;r4 .ts 3ar"t.a".13 ah,t p.-p/e h.t/" 1/te ..lila/ a.dl".hh-/-g.J k -,--A-tu 1.4.*" ;'r"h1,-.3 ti./ J'3c,.,/"r;"s 4-'--r"t 'thcae ;,a.ch1,ahs .h! J3.,.,/ur;es a.t -h/,/ seea;ry/'/';af)-fe oar /;t 5.s -" l"/;",/" aztts./v"s 1o l" a.r" c..7alh 'n sah;.5 -at 7r-l/"zsOut irr.s7-zs;l/" asa7" -{ th} 2",- Lz.J a}'/;1y azy ..use as 1-/;re ., /;fe 4-t3e thaa lefot"' th"r.;h ftsa/1;ry 'h th" ,t"k/" ,oh"lh"rsc;.h1;31s sha.l/J l" Esf-h';//e ;n "..'l/;ry as d;1/1 "",- ..t'.,1;/i1;8,,ah;eh eaz l" a,s14"J A .i.7 ih Lr,o/-.r -f the 'ta,,/ .-/1et e s(;e/li.r1sJ/larlJ .-l 1c tteld .c.-'./.Ja eC4laih/y,..3.'",1'sl ;. 4//','i.zr '3 a)-l Dhn'h .'h/y a;h,t,v;Jt1.,/ ^';111thc ,e.ess.ry ;hl"//".l ,1h,,/ 3k;//3 ..o a"d"ft.*e ..',/ 5- /-h9,i3 /1.fu/r/s h;sr-l ft?u;teaehls .tt tlte "h/ ./ th" ,/a,t, -h'.h B 1- ;d"h1-r JB..ret s-aet/1;ry th.1 .tu l" -r l.rcr1 1- th" sd;"1'/' h" has"- -l/b.,1;ah;{ ;1 berc la l" -3"J , "s/'an;l/t ly ataN;nJ 7h";'{e.1,-h -f J/tq'1e Dh;.}t das ?3"/ l- h"/l 4;.er3 ctltu l r.//a.'l/ez,n"ruls {r-a 1/e ".i1h /1as tu,- e/-k"/ ;.1- d Jek.31al'4 {-r.1" ./',t"s1tu.1;-. Dh|h D;// erehlaa//,/, thte./:"h th" dii31",,." -l m.bl;h/;{ a3eJ ,.r se/rsh hce,!3. 1:1 ;3 lheftLte ;//a31tat",t th.1 5-.;e1y,3"/f slt jp"s th" a3e3 cf;,/eh1;-ns .aJ dE.,rr"r'.s ...'J 3/t-a/,1 i1 L?s"J ;..ry,'q lzd l"'4 l"rencia/ 1- aa,);t L'o11/J le d'sastt.t.s5.;e.1313 /1.{" h- ;htt;,s;. te.tt'-n;l;/;1y 1- a""l -kt ft"'13 -t :r"'5"^'"-ar zotrily lat ;1 ,3 the 5-rd hae,ts ^'h- a" r"?a,re/ 1- /- th;':q"h." ;t ;s nol a c-2,:"rn ./ 3c;ch1;3t3, le..4s" ;1 ;3 ler/..J thc;tal;/'1y t- J- 3a.

J

I

16 Sc0aDrq Pr o\Pl0llt5 J/. .'; ..d, /it ui rs.


19/36

aln-a3/{ :;.;e.1,513 cLtet 1- lhe 3pe.;t. J"a.3ttfh,.:3t-uf ,h 3.r'e1y tt6l ae ./raq1) .'ha ..a ./ t.t t/e 1"chn.f1y+.." th" t--1 "bl/"a sl"as ,t-a 1/1e Dea/1/y,is t/1"y.t"l/p arc5 thal .chtr-,/ llE D-r/.t.hd.re thzls t"s?-n,l/. L,r.r"at,Z ?t-!"as a3,ry te(hrc/-jr' 7 )Fftt-ft ;t stbz.// l. th..-h.erh -f 1/1e e/;le ;. '-.,ely .aJ h-Z s.i.h1;sts. It ;s .,h/r,the )'./1 1/1a1 c,h t.;n ;h thc ;/k af t/te r;./t. Ih a fni.t;..a/s.t;e1,/,,..// r-;.es .te,trct-,ft,t -.".1 c\tey' th" ,;.h 1".,a3" th",/c. lret "^/",t 1- k ,?-,*,2/ .6 lAe Lp.1/1h they /1.a/" ,...1/a1t/d"/3eea3 t- aar, lktl thy h.d "32r,/".1 btu-/-b" ./,t adcEt./,t;3-, the ,--t/J 7h;3 /etiles j-r4ha?hzs slaal'"J ,-h"n,t",,/,zq,;1h th",t,t"32a6;l/".t1s le.at6e .{ the;r ;aae6e ;,{/aededet 4a^// t.s.sac' 3.k1/1 ..3 e.ah-a,., jt-D1/1 al E thet eLftefe. 4-re t4l-33;l/e t-r .t.;e,1;313 l- r-;.e the,t .-..eths as1/te;r 31ah./;ry '3 aa.h /-aer 1ka llt" S-.rernzeat .aJ acte-fett h"' r,t -l s,t",l :;1:4" -. h.11 lJ t her/ . /t// e h}c t re,;. A'rp r er-J e,s/t.h .-h.et,s ,.// tfch 1/t. slt-a/.tej 3 -/ lhe -lhet Itch;,/7ae't;.1/ ?e.,/c tE ;1 ;s s;mp/f 1-, he.w a.-,f eth Lj s.,a1;51s

M-ftdct) th. r..f,s1,t: t--ru ret/cre:t :;1!.:.:ca.: .,.d +ae.hJ h6 l,s1tun1"J .s.tehl,.;1.t &rty 4-a 14e;t resp-fi;li/,1;cs,t;3.-fctr, -t.:/-.;4 /1tls .)-h -/et a.,,/ 7".?h ..//i3 ;1 .haa..z;hj Jerel-?aeht: ;h a.hk;,n.s h31.ry th-4/r ..t;t,.3 ti,jae"al^/,-./-.;hj h.s c/tt//"1"t tlr s.dtl;1r/ ct /;te ,r,J t/1" la3;cti1/ns 1c ;h/'\/i,ta.f,1y ,-A;.h h.i .,// .,/-e Le, /.*eh />r y.ht.///t" .slE"t "\r;/"a"ht -ret 1/1e .ea /,3.d.ty ha5 lta,."r"t /"Jna"y,t- lut. a Jet.f e... 1- tto/ro."h/s ./,i,h;3 h-,- ./-.;.3thre.le^t /:hc /i h&/;ah af.,ltnllt hda.'h.t /,fe a,/ -hal ta:;et,/;i lz1;/1 a/,ah l"eaus" ""-' J,3.-/er;c3 .aJ ;tue,1;-hs .te seehi.;enl;313 ae thete/bte h-1 .-'.cthc/ d;Zh tlte u3e ar lltc;r;h/eh1;o's lts /:lEy .see e.t /1 .4r.h..eaeht .6 t,c3r4t ;' lhe;)..n..t .o/ ;, e1/, .lis .teh.r ek. he/.t d.-2,1,1/" 1i /h" 3"."r../

3nD PARAGRAPH rrris $as probablyamong the $eakest points in the ess.y.full ofsweeping statnents about therich and eli1e, Clenent made maryassumptions rboLt a gtuup thatjnst ouldrot be substantiated vith evidnce.Having said thdt, it rvas telling that thercwas no xample nntiord to back uphis claims. Stndents rvill do wll to renindth.mselves that il tby cannot lindcxamplcs lor cldims it means none dislsor .vcn if any did, points rvithotrtexanples cannoL be crcdited rvith mnch.clcnent could have easily adjusted hispoinr ly dhcnssing coryorate conbol overlh. dircction resedch n moving md madehis entitu point far more palatabl.

4Ttl PARAGRAPH w" -"ta "pp*"*t"this point bettr. Clement liams thisargtrnent in the context of a reahsticrvo.ld and in ger.al tbis is a blivablepoint, strngthened by his concludingstatement that shom two kel hcto6 $ hyscientists care lss about the use of thirinventiors. This poi.t would havebenefited from the trse of spe.ific*dples N well s m ei"ansion of *o])ebruadening the discussioD to an issue overthe nedical benefits of biotechDolosr.

'I d'e P

t SR0ADlR PiRSPfUlVf\ rl,.\ripDrf .(' rplnii., t\i/r


20/36

ISSAY MAKEOVER

5Tl| PARAGRAPII rni. po:.t i. -t."uyidenLical to the point raisd t$oparagraphs earlier. Esscntjallytbe pointstill argues that scientists hale to .aterto the needs of th lite or tle wealthy.Ihis common problen vety often occuswhcr students writc witlout a cledrnenlal pictue of how lis a.Sumentshould develop brfualher derloP eachloinL in isolation, nercly thjrktug alongthe lines of for and dgainst. we noti.ethat tIe.e is clar eridenc ofdgumenrador wherc Cienent brings inar opposing point of view ard balan.esthis out with a convjncing rebuttal. Hea.n bdngF in d etuple. reintercstingtling to note is Nhy Clement coddinhoduce an dample for this !oi!t btrtrot the previous, ven though they a.e

6Ttl PARAGRAP|| n i"i. *"tr-.* "rthe b.tter argued poinLs that Clementraisa. Developd succinctly and $ith thesame intoduction ofan opposirg pointof vien folowed br his own auumeDts.Ii is a pity lowever the Clcnelt was notable to raise clea. examplcs a n d did notfinish olf his larag.aph with a vitalconcluding statement thar would havemade rhc link bet\rcen his point ard th

TTtl PARAGRAPH rri" ** " *.1**tonclusion and w6 admitlcdl:i do.e in afiDal nsh to finish on time. stDdents doDot alvays lully alpr{iate how imPofantthe condusion is to w.ap uD oura.gnments. This wonld have bcen a goodplace to sum uD our nactu mdeFtandingof the situation and closc np onrarSunerts. Clenrt did not have eitber.This was not so nnch becaose of a lackin Clement's skills but mthd a lack inClenent's content undrstdding tlat didrot allov him to see the bigaer Djcture.

a"1ruzt-rs aty t+1a" th./ 3.;eht31:t .,d 1/teit 'tueht;chs e'r'31Lr th" 9t",1"r j--,t o/ a.at;./ h-1 .,/y thc e/;tca' 1/12.t they .t"te.,/;1,y', sc,"ft;.rt.s J- ^1 .,,31 1- l"*/;1 th. ".1;t- hda.4,-Pa/at,-h.D"re/.?a".15 ;n i/alaI2r.L-n -n/y l"."Ut t.t1"l"J 3t -aPs MeJ;.trcsJ- n-1 lercta1 1/t" t-ar ts th"/ are ia/y f,."/ ot-i -{ t/t" rec,ett-{ th" p@r .a'd h-,- atz.h 1-J,a/ hare kF seeh a.r.a.eae,l ;h ae&.ds.;.,'." 3kL./ /:-,-,r'ds ,..;a/ aa("-r'"E d r/a31;. s?ryery 8a1->.is .o "\aap/" ,//as1tut6 1ltis .E// .,3 .t/".r/y ;tu"h1'-ns /;k" th's ,+".-t .t".l"J Lr 1/1e p-a/ 3/1-t'3 lh,1 3.,"h1;313 .re hot .a .er,e4

Otlt"rs,t,t l"r; ry ; h at;.;-, ma/' 3a53e31 lha/ 3.;"ht:;3t3 aFr-h.etreJ ,./-L4 /1at., the't i,'/eh1,.hs a" as./ Lcats. -f;,,.t.."5;.jt-.:"rns i-a 3.,eh1;513 -n t/1e el/..13 -f tlte;t ;,/e'1;-n .h lhe.*;t-nz"n1. -fh,s ;5 u/,a"h;.//y 1t1/e .5 sc;e,t'513 ft.f;ze th.A L/l;/eth"y htat" "xJ/e/ aak'/,t 1- ha'. o ;*:r".,s"/ 31./k/ar,! ol /;r;,! lb4/ttaloza ly a 3r"t/ '/.t;ely ahl ?aah1;ly -t 3.o/5 a,td" riva;/al/"' y"t;.,Jdntn./'s./;-. /1,i3 /eJ l- 7-//zt1;a o,t "*;t -h4",1../ Jd.g" 5.;41;n5a.t, ,-n ha-dt l" a1,/e 1- aq"r co,:t"/:" 3t"r3 ta r"s-L" ;1 k .us.c.,p;1.!/;.ta h6 1"". z.ite 1o-;-heteht ,h -/1t 3d;.1y 1- l" 1-1.,1'/'read"J lat 5.;ch1;31.5 /1.i\.e r-;.eJ 1/tc;r .-rEerh.5 t. c..l: J--h -h..nlah en;ss;ohs.

Zh ..h./23;oh, 3.;e,l;313 eann-1 tnJ ta n-1 htv" t- l"r8tdn,//e ,-r .ttt;Z;a3 a.h(;'J tuth tuL Lu"4 ..,o.J,/,t;4 l"c.us"of tal /at.!:.'ca/ re.,'dt 'a.h .6 ;1 ;s h.'t ;h lh.;t 3f,4"t" al,fl2".,:"ahd hat. s.a;ety Jes h-1 h-// thea .c.oah1tJ/" 4-,*t"\1h"r" a"3.;crlB* '.h- are ;/,1ee/ .-,t"tkJ .'l-d th" Tral/"zs ttr;s;ry /t'athe;t ;hrchti.hs a.J /1.n" 1.". aattc ;hherchl ;h 3a.,c1y thd t/E;ra.1;ahs a^/ /e./ o1l1et310 le/;ere th.it tlt.y te,,i231 la/:/:;hq -h.a

,.',1.t hao t11",/ ar" us"J a/1h-agh th"/ shaztlJ "th;ca//'/ l"

l8 BR0ADtR PtR5PtolVtS r/L .f nr.r,\' /.l,ti, rr i55r,'


21/36

OUR SUGGESTED NTAKEOVERFOR 3 OF Cl.rMrN l S IIOS t PROBLIjIIATIC PA1]tr\GRr\PIIS/r'/t-t iwentinS anJ llSc.;tteieS ar,e uSel iS n,cl l/rcca,Tcet/1 a{ lh. sc).nlisl. }o you a3r."?'tbday s scientific frcnt is fraught with contrrwrs,! ovcr thc usc ofscicntific iDlcntioDs anddiscove rs. DcrclopmcDts ir thc arcas of biotcchnologv, nuclear technology andnanotcchnolosr tonameiust a fei{. havep.ompled lhescienliUc community Lo be hr nc,recaulioLrs in $hat the! are pioneering and vn to discuss the levelofresponsibiiirr'scientistsshouklbeir. XlaD) irveDtjo$ and discoleries seemiDgly inprc\'e ourlives, but scientistsbeliele that these ue short term gai$ that nay tum a$1]' iD thclong ruD. ScicDiists shonldbe more responsible or at least coDcemcd iD cducatiDg thc cornmunit_v and govcmmentsovcr thc irnplicaiions ofthc discoledcs, if not outright taling leaderc|ip in tlese areasthcD$chrs. This however is rnLrch easiersaid than done as scientists haye to conrplyrvjlhboth econo ic and politicaL limitations $ Dmcli as:uv other citizeD ofthjs modeni rarkl.Certahlr, thejob of a scientist is a special tositioD that vcrl'fci{ caD fill, brirging $ith iturli.tue rcspoDsibiliiies to bingbcncfitto socicty. Yct, as thc scientistbings nes'knowledgeand tcchDolosics into thc $'orld, h. c.nnot be cxfecied to be Ield responsible lbr eleryDcw aftli.ation oft|al lnowledge nor nlisuse olhis ew lechn.Jiogies. Developnents innlclear tec|nologies illuslrale this pojDt wellas scientists clearly see the potentirls as ilellas dangers that tiiis discoveLt can briDg. !_ct, sln dNc lt, roguc statc or tcno stb Dgdevastation to tlie h nuD racc, lvc oftcn foint fing$s stmig|t at goycrnnrents that Ialefxilcd io sccurc thcsc tccbnologics aDd not t|e scieltist !v|o discovered tiren. lhis doesnot mcaD th.t scientists are devoid olresponsibilitv bul ralher Lhat jn cases like this thee{tensive Lrse oftechnologies as powerlLrL as this will olten be taken out ofthen hxnds.E\en ifscientists were conce.ned. it$ouldbe oflittle use.Thcsc days, scjcDtists oftcn also nork for major corpomtions w|o invesl healily intcchnological rcscarch, h.nce nranv conrfoveNies in lhedelelopnenl ottechnolog.' ne rstronr exe.utn? decisions made b! (hese companies. Lver ilscjentjsts $.aDted to be coDcernedabout Lhe connne.cial use oltheir discoveies ther \roukl Dot be in a positio! to.ljctateu'hat they feel is the co.rect diection. In crpitalistic societies, the corforate voic. oftcnh$the nDst sayard exerts grcatirflucncc orrhowsocicryis shat.d. Evcn gov.n DcDtsthcmsclvcs lra\c a hard tnck..pnrg conrpanies nr c.|ect, nNC.| less scientists as enrployeesof these companies. Detracro$ nia! argLrerhat scientists and theirinventions exist 1b. thes,reater good olmanldnd nnd not sinidy fc,r rich corporatioDs. Iderllytliis ma) seem so.but jD reaLit). scientists are as nNch victims of market forces as arrrnody else. Just considcrour irvestmeDt of time and rcsources in applyiDg science to dcrelof cosmctics and bcautvtreatments rs opposcd to mcdical hratrncDts for th. poor. Sci.ntists should be coDcemedo!$thisNarycd rnisrptrot ation oiscienlilic lnorledge but can do litue about it.

l9 BR0,{DtRPtRlPttTlvt5 rif s.tc'!?&,??iaion riJ,(l


22/36

ISSAY MAKEOVER

YOURESSAY'?

I AKriOVr]R"

IN SUIII{ARY/4/lernative slanJanJ VointS lo eonSiJerldeally, scientists should be concerned:

scientists are in a unique positjoD, where knowledge and uDderstanding c,ftheirinventions is priry to them aloDe- Governments may have aD executive .ole lolegislate science bLrl even drey dcfcnd on scientist's daLa and rcscarch to make

the comnunit!, at large thtrs expects scieniists to takc oD a grerter role, movinginto the public e) and elucidatiDs us on the delelopments they are mrking andthe resultaDt conlrovemies. ScieDtists need to assume tositioDs ofleadershipbcing the best advocates for theif owr research.In addition, the unprecedented powcr bestowed b) science andtechnologr-' today should compeL scientists to take responsjbilityand possiblt even liabiliil for the effects ofthei. inventions.

Yer practicaly, ever ifthey are concerned it makes litde differebce, mfingit pointless to do so:It is nDfortunate theretbre, that scientists these dals are often under acoDtractuaLobligation to the llrms thal |ife thcn, or even the states that support their rcsea.ch.ID a case where the scientisl js merely an cnployee and not a lree ageni. iibcconesdidlculi for then to tale individLral rcsponsibility as tlty cannot always be accolurtablelbr their oMr actions.Market forces o. economjc factoN are also often n ch stronger thaD the scientist sabili\ to control the use olhis invcntions or ctiscoveries. He nrayb. corceDed,bui poi{erless to change the generally anorrl direction that today's coDsunernrarkt may choose to go.Political intervention or national agendas also often bccomes an issue for nan)scientists. Lacking the auionomyto set agendas themselves, scientists often haveto adherc to the lead of the govemncnt they work fbr. Scientists 'nay want tobe onccmed, but politicaL apathr is unfofuDately the choice mnny make in rcsponseto the por{crlcssness thev feel i initiating ]mliiical charge.In a very utilitadan scnsc, the bokl pioneering naturc ofreaching breakthrouSlsnr science and techrologysimply does not allow a scientist to bc overly concerned.Being pedaDtic and overly cautious is hadly the mindset a pioneer should adoptind would ultimately cornpromise the ke)' intention ofilhat the scientist nccdsL

20 ER0lDtR PlRSPttTlVtS tlescience& rcli.rion 'ssu.


23/36

A MATIER OT OPINION

How would A NEO-LUDDITI and A HINDU IINESCO BURF-AUCR\T respond sincethey come from such diverse belief systems and working agendas? Our wdters getunder their skins to find out.

c(t,(JMN /

N()ALLO$ED /

4 CONINIONEXAITTPLES /

CONIEXI / Sure, science prorides us maNelloNsolutions, but are we too quick to chase downtechnologies that we do Dot undeFtand tullv? I'Iorethan tliat, do rve have the systcms and strategies tohardle the technolosics if they go aMv? Such fearslead many to preach a far more cautionary approaclito the management ofscience - advocating ethicalwatchdogs, govertrment regulatjon aDd control oftunding for resea.ch. But what maDv scieniisis fea.is that nany iD thc public and indeed s'ithin theI'r'.ar.r. v do .ot urde-.Ldid.ci.n.p \"n $.llinthe first place their tears may be fbunded more on

E)a{IIPLES /a) The nreritable international narch toe,ards stemcell research due to global competition: GerTnonand US ldi,indkers ease limits on sien-cellrcsear,:h due ta competitionf otn Asiatl countres.

b) Lcsal oDDosition fron concerned citizenn to thesta{ up ofthe Large Hadron Coliider (Luc).r ApprcrJotoFnrl ' lmp-rl3\sdr. n rnJlst, .i".for research or for coDsumptioD: B/ifi:si s.ienn:srs

succeed at tnakiq hundn cow embrqos andAnleticai FDA apprcues clones as safe lbr eanng.ad science fiction movies than real scientificd) UNllScO's 1997ban on htrma! clonins

wonan h.Mng .figurine af $esarre Srreer s.ienr6l cloracl.r A?.td l'rro Io cRrjDn / iV lcot, flickr Creatiu Contnons21 8R040[R PIRSPIO VtS r,le sci.rc & rdioion rssre


24/36

A MATIER OF OPINION

A Neo-Luddite AnswersLudrJ.ites ofthe past smashed any machine they could find. Though generallyless violent, today's Neo-Luddites are more educated but no less disdainfulof our obsession with technological solutions. ,ls conceived,bv Marv r,ee

How far should Science be regulated?

d lls ourour tradiLions and

will Dot bcro his causc

instcad soldiers onus lihe aprothet onher our tedmologicdlrvill get $.

a halt to potentially dange.ous scientific research. Yotrall laushed and p t nre in the r.tnks ofNco-Luddite| -r |\d. )?ln.L.: S, InFonp e\, r :r1 u"rd mP of ". | 8a q'pical Ame can rvho had devcloped technolosl,bccane superj ich because ol iL, and then cried wolf'to siop anyone else from going do$n ihe sanie path'Ihdrs a cti. $hdl'1"o,\, up-Ll.oJirr.. Jrr"!.:nBlo .oirail d' \i 'upl| g cn'rr'l i-\ lrorn .n .l rtsreeDhouse sascs after first pollutins the world andbccoming rich and powerful.'Ihat\ not it. Ilave )ou $'atched l Tre ,ludt d,rvherereality and\irhal realitr are battling to control thercal rvorld? or "ne sdlh dtl, where people are clore.tand abl to retum to life? Or I, Robot, rvhere powcr_hungry robots fiBhi Manfor coltLrol ofthewo.ld, $ll,Lo. Alge. .,r.sd l Dnlo.r n.n" ,l of.l ' rr".i".are jusi fisments of nnasination? Think asainlRly Kurz$'eil, the deservedly famous inventor of thefirst reading machnie fo. the blind and nany othcranrazirg ihings, told me that the accclcratiDg rale oftechnological improverncnt was n1al


25/36

RIIATID 55UI'P0Ilcsst tNct IIHtt56OVIRNMINTRfltGt0N

lLlstea.l of aDs\criDg th.s. soul searchiDg ctuestio!s,all we hcar is thc rnanfua ol stem cell researchers:stcm c.ll therafl has the potential to draDraticallr,-change dre lreaLrneDt ofhunan discasc. But doesrhis noble souD(lirs eD.ls justifi thc Drcans? What slhe noral point $'c want to mike {he we build alife-saiiDg sollltion uDon a stackofenbrp corl)scs?I am sad to see the ;nevitable iDtemrtional marchto\{.}ds sten) cell research bccausc of simplep.o 'onr. L., rnr,D:Ihl I s l:,$ rr'l,cr\ hat ingto erse up on prc\ious linils sel on stenl(ellreseuch.nd ftrndingduo lo (oDlpctition fi onrlcss rcstrictirc, hore pr{gmatic lsian D.tionslikc Sorth l(orea.l am vert concemcd t|at a loungcoonL..' lile Sinsrpore isbccoDrins. Iaven lb. stemcell research as jt aspircs to b. a bio edicaL liub.SjDgrpore has b.cD able to atLract rnanr youngEtrropcan and Arnerican scientists $'lD hav. bc.nliustrated br their own rountries' iass rcstidnrg llreuse ol certain lines of sten cells. ftough SoLrlh Korca

has . |uge er algelical Ch.istirn cultur and Snrgaporehas a st.on$ Dnrlti-religiors basc, t|crc hrs been oatleqn to put sone musclc iDtothe reseNaljo s tliatrelisious sroufs havc aboui steIn cell research..'....,,, d- l,. iirLF|aal ,t: , rp.,.arguDrcntslllinallt, there is the rttcmpito find drc Cod larLicle''or the brsis ol crcation. lhe source of light,r,.':,-li,.JldsJ , ,-F,' .i.'t.. r!.t.To do this, thc rvorld s largest and highest cDcrgvp!ftclc rc..leraLor lhe Large Hadm Collidcr orLHC l)as betr built. Dothos. fhvsicists care lhatlhe) risli the destNction of our flanel'/ Ol (oursenotl I st{Dd bi ihc lcAal oppoi;t;on froDrconcemeal citizcnry lo lhc sla up ofthe LHC- rrc should not tu.n Lhat aton sm{sher on till $r,J\''1,.,l.,rF Ur0!u, rl , 1l .r- ^hi,eminaLure bLack holes will rot bc crcatcd b!the LHClPhysicists niayarguc that t|ere is Lro basis lorsuchfers'and that assessmeJrLs olrishs are impossiblcbccaN. of inconrplete, eyeD fundaDentallyflai{cdstandard nrodels oIpafticle phlsics. Thatjlst prolest|q slrould not go ahead xith it, don'i r''ou t|ink?Eut I am Do loDgcr dccNing the lict that Do oDes.cDN ilteFsled in lbrcjDg these scieDtists bcnt onrcscarclr doilr dubious patlis to abidc by an ctlir'al,i,rid In,i..iIIi ..,'LI,', \,l ecoroIicsuicide" argurnents. Wcll, Dron.v isr'i everythjrg.LleD UNISCO dc(idcd to ban hu,nnn clonirgin 1997'adccision globallr accepted and advoc{tedb1 countnes lile l.rarcc. Japan and TuDisia $'hichall asreed tlrat human clonins i{ould devalue Lhedignjt! ot humaD beings aDd natural hunanreproduction. This rras a decision not based oDeronomjcs but on furc realisaljon that we sinthcannot cnablc \'|at palcht knowledge $'e have tolcad ns do$'n the gardeD prth ofa moral (or litm.l.ir the cas ofihe LIIc) blackhol.l'lo parapluase Dotcd fastoral luiler Ricli WarreD,i{e reallv arc but rnis t.)ing to understand thcIntcrD.t.I shonld know:t helped poi{er the Int.rDctlSo, $'|at I want lo do ros'is to design a tutur. of rnvchoice: choose $'hat I $'ant thc future io looli like.rnd rork tonards t|at. at

IHRISTOPHIR DITHIR]VI:t00KllG tvDElHtBRA]IIIN RIAI I ]\IId/136

0iliL rywile irtl{pper fg

f.,l)

iE0UTTHl,fltIiR

WA]IH TH]S

23 BR0ADIR PtRSPtO VtS t/rrs.t.,r.r.t lrliqion iss!c


26/36

A MAIIIR OI OPINION

A Hindu UNESCOBureaucrat AnswersWorking day to day on global problems that could have been easilysolved by the right technologies would incline anyonb to support lessregulation of science. As conceived by Arnellia Razak

How far should Science be regulated?cience is strange and beautifulibut surely moderating its progrcss isenough as opposcd to eliminaling itconpletely? I anr apfalled that $ere arc

those who call for science to be qnashcd especiallv$lren s.ien.ehas madc life bea ble for the sick. andsiln hope to the abject. Scieme should be only mildlyres ated and Neo Luddiies ca g forsciencetobcput on a bal and chain '!ill, I fcar, be a danger rather

ln this Dew ilorld ofscicntific progress. the march"sr-d .r-r , .. re.pa-rh du, lo rlub.'l .ompel'r'nis inevitable. The .ed ction in stem cell researchfundnrs nr the USA has resulted in established

Dames loolins for more scientific necdon abroad,andwhat with Gcmany abolishing its 2oo2policyallowing its scientists to usc or y existing cell lincs,the racc to becom the biggesi biological hub is on.Singapore's focus on the research-irtersive sectorto diversi{y its econonic bale confimN that scienceis advancing at a speed nerer before knoim to eist,and t{,ing to rcgulatc tiris speedy gro$1h caD costcounties more than its econonv.

to Nlan s nany

God is beloDdh!u1dmo.e doctrnral

wirh son olm.re erlrNe

IrN Fdn.aiional.and Culrural

ad!ocaresactLjfg ol globalslard..ds a.d!nive.salts on theof ethicalUN ESCL)$.orldt}e need to

and sharso

rvorld c.n Drc$es.quesrionteor,!dditesLhei. otr$illthe verv thnrgswant to save

thcir obsri nac,ts tccbologicala.d gi!iDgaredon

this sobstitution protects rather thaD destroys the

biolog,\' ofcmbrylnic stem cells is what the scientistsin UX hope to do by jnserling hnmaD DNA intohollowed eggs doivcd ftom caLtle. A Nco-Luddite.nr ' ,.q s"ll i\ .har li.l-'brid nd-", hnnd . 'mark of nanufadured as opposed to organic ljfe butI do not bclieve ae are dullnrg ourhunaDity whenhtrman egss. Likewise the Us Food andDertopmeor A horitr GiDA) publishcd a rcpoft..ntJ 'i r;pr-, i\a'-forn it or'"buJr.on.,,l rcnl.. r'milk andmeatproducts obtaincd froni cloned cattlein 2c)l16, concludirg ihat consuneN have nothing tobe wary ol Ifthcrc has been approval ofgerelictupe.ing wirh aDimal species lot researchor consuDrption, thcn I aD rr there is no needfo. scicntific expLoration to be kept on suc| a tight

benrs UNIISCO'S 1997baD on human ctonils.it is not ne.ely globally acccpied, but adlocated br-'.o' rIr,, ..r' I r' I ran.c. lrpxrr an(l IunisirNhich all agrec that cloning undeDnnres the dignityof liunaD beings andthe concept ofnailral humanrcprcduction. ln accordaDceto ny beliei!, every maris onc i{itli all beings in ihc cDtn uDileNe. The Luritrof all selvcs neam that if I hann aDother man, I harnr

EsseDtially if sciencc $'ere to be regulaicd, globalcthical sta|dads have to be set lirst, an cxample

Where ethics is coDce.ned, you would e\pect mypaDtheist belicfs to ciash $'ith that of m)' motrotheistpeers, but surprisingll theytoo see no objcction to'\! ur nJ \.Fl.e d\ J pi!.o. dn !\dr n tv.r 'scounilcss problems. lve agrcc that exploring scienccdoes not bv itself pose a threat io maD or liis humanirybut it is what nc do reith the discovcry tliat couldha.n or violate codcs ofethics. UnderstaDdiDs the

I myself: Good corlduct and risht cthics are the highestof dharma andirust nie when I say that the UN hasachieved this delicatc aDd enormously difiicult taskof providing n moral framervork to scieniific

24 BR0ADIR PtRSPtfilVts r]t. s.ien.. & reliqion tssle


27/36

I I 1 nlu 7.t.tuL n1 L.! nqd n,\'.]r r! i,rLix! |lLdJ l lrnrr (,niurTh. LTNESCO s d.di.rLior lo strllii,,g a brhnreb.h!..n rh. 11!o is Lerll,,r),r\ 1o tlLe li(tthats(icntificln.$Itlle, r. be slrrcd lDl disicn utcd for gl(nllThctho ght ofhtilg nr.\tliil o ,1).dil\ t\isterire$'iihout $i.n...rosrs Dr\ nri.(lr1 Li,i,es Jlrirli01it tI.: rbur.. ol 1h..|.irrisl,r. biolo{r xDl tlLet|rsi.s .l .\. i \1 iirs ro!ld leare us grrtirg ir thcdr,lt. ,!1 l,rlirillrir. \hicl) is $hv lcsrl oppositionlr) lh. strrt up ofihc l-u$e IhdroD collklc.(l IIC) mryrisrd nxi. \\hilLi I und.rslrrd tll. rliL,1,,oftht globll connnunitr Nl lhri lll.,,9lll .1 r,ri(robhck lol.s i..1slIn11.l{.Ls rjrr)err i,,s o!l ol the L]IC.this is onr.lu... 1. ri\tliLir tl,e rirlure olniatter. totind ll lh. lllsg s lro{ni e\ids.I doubt lur htrmrDi\'$oul,L lJe djscourled iD anv ${! clcn ilthc Big Brngtlieor\ \'as tNc, or if IIigg s bosm ti\ist.d. li)r N,.rr l i,r ', ,, " 1 ..our-qchcs in qMrks.lctt..s and rlo.rs co!l(l nrerDcvcNlhing.Dd Icl rlso .rn .o1l,j,,S: $e are roln..cssDilI ftr h.r fNrr lrcrrr ullerstanding thedi!in. rill o1 ltie!Di\erseil\!ehrvtthcirtclligcncclo (Lissect onrseh es to the rudirncnts olotrr {i\ist.nLrand uDdrrnlld thrt rlc. lik. rll otl.r thi.gs r.dliling bcirgs, rrcjnst matt.r.Scicn.c hrs r.,r.hed Lirl 1o tolclr Llre slrld.,\s rbur.iu.ml. I hrre \eer i1 (hrnle l)olitics. Is a, .lisilni s l! Lloler. I lrr\ e seeD it qurni(rl ixiths \\hrtis scieucel'jCrD it br ch.clcd? I do lot lnror! 1;r s,1,.brt I .Lo harc frith thrt lhn \rill trtogni*i .lli.rnirrn.l cloos. il 10 lnat 1l,e (oslrjc sell I rcalitv. f:

IlRATIDISJUI5P0t. T t5( tlitt ftIc!G0[fRNt{tit1lt G]lN!rr1(ll lH S

THtUNi.IRSt1]l.lASIR]IIC(vr rcd ro n/lidex p rp/ro rt! r/id/'251

8l0lDI!orD.ll


28/36

Onward, Singapore!\'Yh\. Si[gapolcuns dor'L kick up a f ss lbout scicnce'sItv []hirtlig IIonjt ll.cul & ]iuili Shiao ] ill

sing of God lcading them tovictory on the battlefield anclthe Bdtish sing ofGod blessingtheir Queen, Singaporeanssing of progressing ton'arclshappiness together.

If national anthemsencapsulate a nation's coreaspirations and noblestdreams, then it is quite plainwhere Singaporc sta n ds:our dream is to improve, toexcel, to climb the world'ssocio-economic ladder oneindustrious rung at a time.

elhicNI c(mtroversies.

n God is our trust.God save the Queen.Majulal.r Singapura.While Americans

% llR0,|jllPIR\Plil,'t5 /irrs,rrrr.!,rli,ii,,, ir,!


29/36

SHOWME THE I'IONEY/ \^'-ith her latesl plar toachicvc cconomic success, Singapore is.aisnlgcyebrows riortdlvide on a much ln.serscalethis time.Singapore is positionirg herself as a scjencc hub.ra.ll,,h ..'rn .rr.'l J, .".l,"ld l .,d-r1,.,dr..that lured the world's best clcctronics corporationsJl rlru.l ir.l, ro-^..\'rgJlar' r'.,rt.,il-,,8phannaceutical comfanics likc Pfiz.r and lle.ck 1.)sct uf shop, do t|eir reserrch and derelopment

I1"S OII SO QTIIET/The question is: If research intostem cells and cloning sets tongueswaggrng ever].wnere. wny are sofew ofthose tongues Singaporean?\\'}ydon t Singaporeans bring theirconcerns aboutscienlillc advances up to the socjetaLlevel or engagethe 8o\mnent in a constructive debate? Is it fear,aprthr, ignorrDce or allofthe abovc? Couldthisjusib' .. rn!,|"n, . - rl . ,, "r. -- Jd) a lli.Ir gSiDgaporcans? Stcrcot)-f icallv, most Singal)oreansi .l. i..nt. e^vi rnr ,.r 'ti"l' F rr Jg,,.l' o, \oi,"th.n unhatpiness |alfheartedlt, but thet ultinutellaccepl these chaqes unquestionnUly. The occasiotnldiatribe iDthe FoNm pages isofteD outshonebythcgovemneDt's repeated affirmations that such adecisioD is tukeD in the iDtercsts of SjDgaporc's longterm economic stability- Thc disaffroval Lrsuallysubsidcs i{hilc drc rroposcd policies ar in\ten)enled.The average Singaporean restricts his gielances tothe coffeeshop or over lunch. Compare this to ihevehement opposition seen in B tain ir rcspoDse tothe government's decision to pass a Bill allowins thecloning ofhunan'annnal h)'b.ids in March 2oo8.It polarised the Cabinet and set otr a war ofwordsbtween senior Labour figures and the RomanCatholic Church. There can hardly be a starker

wit]roul intefarence and pass on thei. techDologicrl

The constrtrctjon of Biopolis and FusionpolisuDderscores Singaporc\ dctcDnination to fioneersomeihing rcvolutionarr-' iD the field ofscience. Sodocs hm rclativcly liberal lake on stem cell usage:while tie Gernnn. A erican and British Lrwrnalersdebate ove. \rhether sten cell rcsearch is taDtamountLo Inueler ofernbrlos, Singapore pennits st.m ccllsto be taken from aborted fetuscs or discardcdembryos, alloryins the en$rl'os to bc cloncd and keplfor up to tao nccks toproducc sten cells.This |as inspnd asLun|ing reyerse brajn drah f.onWest to l]ist. Att.acted bI he. bold ambitioDs tomik heaclivays ni science throush liberal laws andgenerous state fundiDs fron oycdoi{ing coffcrs,\rorkl-renown scientists fiom.rafaD to IISA haverelocated to Singaporc: gcncticist Alan Colman; tot)canccr reserrcherc Edison Liu. Sir David Lane andYoshiaki llo; medici e speciaLisls Idwa W.llolnesand P.olessorJudith L. S\!ain.

27 8R0,{D[RPtRSPttTlVtS I/r]s.'dr.r.{' rrtrnn r:eje,

5URtI 5SiNGAPORI A HAVTII fORSTIl\,1 itI RtsIaRtH2006/08/r//bu5iner!

tu ibenl !!v!irr rlilield

Ir!nr!kd wirh thelr


30/36

IAd aDralganutio! ol lacto$ - a corse, !.tivc ,\si culLur. tlratvulu.s trcscNrtion ollh. strte o!e. (1. indiiidurl:a r.rLio.rlilclinatioDto$a s sellprcs.NrtioD rrd selJ:c.nsoNhip: a p,essthrt is norc r lafiner ol lhc statc and less ol. Natchdog ]lisspailned a distinctilely Sir8aprcan menlalitr, oD. thrt is overl]cauthus ard seldom challenils tlrc gotenrnenl s dccisidis'lhcsc.lo aldress r!h! SiDgapoierds tcnd t(r {i!l)r.ss drcirli !sl tiinis !hut liol bnttrtr tuPics lll'. .ducrtidr. l,erl1h.rrc,|ouslog rnd nicone ler Lls.But these do notlrcb us !Jrd.tst.nd\ir tl,e gl.brl dcbrte o\ ercthi(rL coirLrordsics iD scie... brrch regjstfrs.lliP oD llleSingrforcr! cull,,hl fudrr. l|e,e rP|urs n) be li, .r.rc ntlnle,.rsns whl Singrr).rc.ns do !!t lir L Llf r luss o\ er 1ll..tllicrlcOl). lltIODIL\& IIIllI-IIrljSCIl.NCl.SlTlrcseLurrllonof reLigio,, lj o.r thc strte t$ u.ll is thc relisi.,Ls Dulic!| o1 tlrtsSnrgafore!. .onrnnurit\ Inlslil hrlc nmch to (1. Nrth shxPi!,r,slngrporcani subducil rcsf or!e'llr drjnori\ olSi,,gr1)otr rns $,M (oi d.nmal th. 30\ e r.mtselrbi*rtioD on iLs sl.nr tlll aDd crb, i(l jouDcr $ere !trinlr'lioDr rf onotlrcistic reljgl.lLs.rnnnuritls. lIiD\ Sirgxloft rnChisti rs.,l.ivs !nd IlL,sll.rs fiicl that (loi,jrill rnd c\fcrirnenLson hunln e,rbrlos rrc non!h qtr:hcnsible l,), lllcrfcrcei\e.nbNos as ll!.rrd bcirgs mtde jn ood s inug. rd.l tlrus.d.s.Nilg ofrigl,ls ln thrm. clorj.g Lrq!fs (ldls r'.hgrti\'.lr A,LBust:oo1, tlie CNlllohc [1e(]j(rl G,Lild ofSirgrri,)r h.ldr prr\.r $ssid t! f(\ rgriDsi .nli r1o. i. stcn !.llr en'NrhBut the Irrio.itl of Singrto,.rns rrc n!L ol th. Drorotheislj(tilhs thrt liavLr tIc most issLr.s lrith Sclen.c inr'ho\t.Singapore is.+2 5% Bu(ldhist, belie!1lg nr a religior th.t hAs !oth.ologicll co!11jct $'ith sciencc thrnls t{r its reb!lons siandabout $ficthertliere is a God.Without. Snfrcme C.e.rlor.IIancrnrotbc accused oldislortilg IIis pla. b] ftrkcdrgwith nattrclD rdlilio., Buddhisl.\.n t.rches Li,irl lilc nrl corri: irlobcirs irL ! \N.n'ry ofNa\s. ol which sci!ai q)rodlriiur is lrrrronti r[te, ! s. \dr] rc]rrxhi(ljon hrs no dj\ i..ll srncti(lLed0.ioritr over ,)lh.r nlodcs o1 pd'.crtron. l,jle .rn th.rcforeb.gi. nr mxn\ \.rrs iDd. theollsjmll!. cl)Dn)g roL,l(1 rot l)c'see. rs i fr)Lrlenuln' ln lu)lo8r. Iiir Lhurur.. irr cr)nlust tooLlrer nrriDstrerlr n'ligrons. llu(L,lhists regrll hlLmrnituli\ idrulill rs an iLlL,si!i] .r mirage. cknrirg \tould Llrercl.nnot threirter or dc\rlue L|. |.r$malilr ,), rhrra(ter ol rn

\

8 BRil0,l P R\ft lt


31/36

SURITl] 5

6IRMAII II1i/MIKIiSt,{st M il0 sT!!1Glt RtstrlRCHmrkltlDohh|]evy'dl]sll]471967200804|?Po!cN!mber?&v!tuoB'0ndr:home-0

OB I!-\RKERS/ Nso, nost ofthc monothcists r!hodisagree i{itli the state's policy oD life scicDccs do notdispute it bqond thcir brcthrcD, bei.g rell sc|ooledin thc govcrnmcnt's Dolict to keeD Dublic debate I;eefrod an!-discLrssion l]1religir,n. lhis policyto keept}e plblic sphe.e deljberatelt neutral my not be thebest nar to engender loDg-tern $cial matu tv butit certaiDll Dnkes serse in the short tenn, considcriDgthe niultjple nxtive aDd rcgional rcligio!sseDsibilities SjDgaDorc has to DreseNe.

J USl l H l.l llAcl S, NI. AI\l/ OLtr nationil ideoloe)offragnraiism has defined our country s approachlo scierce andtechnoLos/. Singapore lias been nisedon a technocratic dream. To us, society's nostdauntins problems can always be solved with ihepmctical application of the ght technology andknowledse. The Singaporan education system sapproach to scientific education primarily focuseson the good that science can bring rather thaD theresponsibilities that science must uphold.

lire5.Uirlcr rhc hi

,/ri h". o l(jrYed lolmporil,llly l, ?001 rcrlr|'rhof

ifipre(rl[ed.

IN Tlllj GRE/\TER GOOD lVE TRUST/Scoltish novelist J. M. Barriecommented that "One's religion rswhatever he is most interested in."Singapore's government andSingaporeans themselves areundeniably most interested ineconomic sustainability andprogress; if stem cell research andcreating cybrids can help achievethat, then it cannot be faulted.T]1e starkest differnce between the nations wherethe debateisthe bottesthas to do with the fact thatmany Western constitutions (USA, UK, GernuD,are founded upon Judeo-Chrisiian tenets or liberaldemocratic values while Sinsapor's is not. Simplyp,r.. b"ca.bp oI ou- L.lieI\. b' dn ro, "pp violal oiof ethics where oihers do. It jsjust not part oftheSingapore ideology of pragmatism. We tend toprioritise practical solutions lhat help the greate.(econornic) good abore uplioldins concepts likehumaD rights, hunur disDit), aDimal ishts ct al.Secularism etnrSujshcs ficry zcalous altcrcationswith tire cool ov.r dnrg logic of .conomic surlilal.

Wc arc taught iD our classroorns that sienever socie,rypnshcs thc tcc|Dological bir.iers a.d elerlbodlbecornes smarter, ]ratpiness. pr osperilr .rnd pr og.essinevitably follolvs. Elhics has never betl a part ofour educati.,n ir scierce )et rnothe. outconie ofour decisjoD io keep the public sphere free of xnihnit ofrelisi{rus discussion. Wc arc onl) k.cn on thepractical facts, not th. thilosothical diflerencesbchindvaning scjentific theories lile er,olLltion andeationisnr o. Lhe potential ethical diLeDlmasfrsenled by adificiil intelligence orthe life scieDces.Ir view ofthe increasinglv trcachcrous stakcs outbcforc ns in tcrnN ofsci.ntific idv.nces, ne i{ouldbc wisc io notdepend on lnaginatism to be tlie solearbito of oLrr decisior naking. Lilie it or not,the .luesl io ns .aised bv olhernations aboutwhetherour neu'est techrologies comproniise our humaDdigrit), nal1h s biodir.sitr aDd thc saDcti\ of lifcare valid aDd sisrlificaDt for Man's fniDrc. If \re areDottalking about them at all in Singapore, it oughLto distu r us profoundly. Ultimately, whilepragmatism has been an ideology that has broughtmuch profit to Singapore's ecoDomy, it should notmalrc us too prod to qtrestior why people elsewherechoose ditrerently from !s ard whether it will seneou tuture generations better ifwe wer to reconsiderour stand. rt

29 ER0AOIR ptKpttTW! r/rr r,,i',.. ,(' rpli.,i., is\,.


32/36

lrE0UIIHl !'lR TfR

Ii.]LI[]REllrAl Iil

Scandalous ScienceEvery once in a uhile, a book cones alo{rg to thro$'mole oil onto the ever burningdebate betwcen Science & Rcligion. Here ar'e our nonl inations for the 6 nrost conho\'ersialbool


33/36

rIIECREATION

tl,. o. wIl.soN

scens ro be universal anons Homo SapieDs.r r-r n-tl.re.r i L "\cieItificanrhsisofretigions,rol\rnolhd 11. t,...,r'^iF.rul.1,t i. a,-FiE:uLbeliefitseu, b tthe conictior rhat reljgioD is oirlimitsto scient ific iDquiN.5. tr.o. wll-soN'sTHE CREATION (2(,06)'l hrlugli th is book. biologist a nd sec lar humaDisI L.o.$rilson tries to bridge the gap berween scienceaDd rcligior in the hope of p.eseNing rhebiodiversity of tr{rth A fome. Brpiisl. Witsonchose Lhis iillc becansc ne lolei{ t woutd rosonrtc si rhclangeiical Christians a srouD thrt he believcd $asso vast and influenlial rhrl without its support,inrportant illobrl goals could not be rcached. Iresntedirnovati!ly as. lerter sernonising to a licrionalSotrthem lirptist niDistcr., WilsoD drails atrerrjon tothc Ded forboth belic\rs and non belicvers to wortitogether iftlel genuile\ carc about crcarion

RICHARD DAI{K]NS'THI.I cOD DIjLUSION (::oo8)

No stranger toruiting bools learnrg dowl religioo (tjkchis carlier flte Blind Wot&tnakct), contr.oversialerllutionist Richard Da$(ins, a protessorofrhe pubticUDde.standing ofSci.nce at oxford, oDce agani fikensrcligious thith to a discase and s.ls as his goalconvincing his rcaders thar atheisnr is r '.braye,,aspiratior. tlo$'cver. as fc'llow scieDtisr O$D cingedchpoirlts oxt, in sinultaneouslr defendi.g evolurionaDdinsistiDg upon alheism in rhis booli_ Dr. Ild\!kjnsfrobabl) sirsle hrDdedlr nakes nnrrc converts ioirltciligent d.slit! than anr oftle teadirg intetiigenr

RICHARD Heroes&Villainsrri D,rr,,ri"{ ii", 'irLtr h ii, rit . ir rr cti. ,,qirq ti ra.r,rr {,.The God ParticleHERO / Co re Mav 2oo8, the lons a'vajted L.ryeHadrcn Collider (LHC) thc$o d's lrrycsr an.t lristrestenrgy pa{icle accele.ator lvili ftrall} be acinated.nraHng one 78 )ur old Pr.fcssor pctcr HjggscspecirlylLapty. With t|e $orld s lars.sr arom,snrasher iIofoalioD, Hjggs can finalll sce jl his ctgart 1964sohrionto one of thc grear pr.)bted$ x;th rhestand.r.dDrodel ofph)sicswas rlght rfto all. I Ie froposed malre.|ad rDass, rllowingirio makestarc, planets anitpcopte.He belicvd the unilerse$,as pnadcd by an lrvisiblefield ofbosoDsthat coDsisted of nuss buttitri. etse.,Lsputicles movc th ruugh t|is lield, bosons etrcdirely stict


34/36

REBOOT YOUR MIND

F amous Illustrations in ScienceYou night have encotntered stranlie refercnces to Pascnl's wagcl or ockham's Razor when )'oureail discussiols on science and cthics. Erer wondered what they wele about? By Nadja NlahTHE CHINESEROOM ANALOGYAmerican rhilosoph er ,Iohn Searle$'anted to prove thal fot all theirsymbol processinit to$'e.,computers could never attain anindeFndent rnind akin to a hornanbeinit. Hc imagi ed a conputer thaicoukl takc Cliinese characters asiDtNt and produce olh.r Cliresechancters as output so conviDcingLythat it could coDliDce a DatiteC|nrcsc spealier that the conrputerwas actual), r rcal chnlese-spenknrghuman. Artificial IDtelliSenccadvocates \rould hypotlrcsise thatihe colnputcr could undcrstandChinese as a ])c$on dc,es.Ilowevcr, searle argued otheNiscusnlg lhis sccorld scenaio. ,\ pu.el)Erglish spcakercould bc in r roo'nwhere he rcccive.t instNctn'rs n)ChiDese characteN and slill manageLo rnaDipllate somc srrnbols h orderto ouqut approPriate Chincsc.esponscs to an audience outside asloDg as he folo$ed instNctions lromabooli that a rcal bilingual speakerhad leli for hnn lhe au.liencejudging by t|e output a s\crsalonewould rot be able to see th{tthe English speaker knei{ nolhnrgabouL Chincse. fhLrs, snniiarl)',computers were only asintelligent as theirinstructions andprogramming andfar from having theirown mind.

a

PASTAL'S WAGERI the 2oo7 TIM F. magazine de.bate rbou l Science vs Rcligion betweenDr lrancis collins an.l Richard Dre4(ins, Collins conchded hisaryutnents uitli Pascalt \{ag.. Frcnch phjlosolher ud nrathcnuticianBlaise\ rLlnrnntioDs on ccftainty ledhimto concl ethat reasoD\!asuntrustworlIr'- and God Nas infi nitely incompreheDsible. tlence, faithin coil cane do$n esserrlialllto t ganblc for $ {er. cq allvun.crtailabout $'hether God eisted or di.t Dot exist Based on his Pionee rgivorli oD probability theo{ aDd the conccpt irf infiniiv, PascaltconclLrsion wrs that ihis was a gamble elerlbo.lv was forced to takebv delauli and sincc tlie potcntial gain rvrc infiniie lifeit wouid be unwise according to probabilitytheory to bet against the existence of God andpotentially lose everything.

God exi5ls re) God d6e.notexistl-G)Living rs ll God e{isls 1B)Livinq .. it God does ndl.ri3l (-e) ll

J, 800rDr0ofc\Dltllvl- u ,tr't,. ^ t..t \ t


35/36

SCHRODINGER'S CATCarLoons like flellsitg, t.iihaaDroand Yr.GLOh I .efer.nced it. So didpopular Arnerjcan drarra,ryr,reru.r. Thoriilh this nrysteioxs catLas appeare.l ir pop cult c .ranytimcs, it is trull .nind-bos'rijDc.ODe ol th. rnost puzzling thingsAxstrjan ph!sicisi jtri{iDSch.6diDgr found iD theCopenhager int pretrtion oIquantum rnechaDics i!as the co.celtof suferposition: r state Ulatconbined all thc p.rssiblc l)osirioDsofa $brtomic luJticle. Sc|tding.rill slrited dre oddncss of thar

assu nrptiim by irmginiDg a scena o$'ie.e r catras put nr a sealedboxlvherc the cafs lifc deperlde.t on Lhestate 01 a srbatoniic parlicle.Li thc CopeDhagen interymlaLjonof q rnlum mc.banics, . s)stenistotx beilg r supe.uosition ol sratesand becones cithe. onc or lheothcr$'hen aD observ:rtioD rrl(s placc.This irnpljes thrt rile Llie box isclosed, t|e syst.nr erists in asupertositioD of b.rLh siatcs of''decaycd .uclelrs/dead cat and''uDdcca!ed Ducleus/ljviDs cft '.WhcD the box open and aDobscNntion is made, the $,avcfnnction collapses into ole ofthe

To put it simply, t]1e catremains paradoxicallyboth alive and deaduntil the box is opened.

O(KHAM'5 RAZOR(or 0t(Al'4'5 RA70R)r{ th ceDtury ljnglish philosophcr aodniar William of oclham dcvised asinipl. device of logical thinting thathas bccorne r Nle oftlinnb iD thccrcation of scientific rheorics.His analrsis was that in rrving tocrp)anr anyp|eaomcnon, ne sho drnake as fenassumptions as possjble.As Iong as we hid multipleconpeting theorics that \rerc qualin othcr respects, the nrcst loSicalchoicc lvoukl bc to selectthe Lheonthat rcq u ired thc feuest as$nrtptioDsaDd fostulatcd the fewcst entiti.s.octham's Rnzor is usuatlyparaphrrsed ^ "All otherthings being equal, thesimplest solution is thebest."

PAVLOV'S DOGAtenn ntade popularbl novels like,^ldoDs tluxlcy's Arore Neu l,yorldrnd Thomas B,nchon s CrauiiU'.sRntr 6ou, Pavlov's dog" isco nlmonl), u nderstood as a pcNonwho mcrel! reacts to a situarioniDstead ot tiiiDking rationallv.Rrssian thysician.nd p*rhologjstlvaD Pirvlov obserled thar dirgscould be coDditio ed iDto certainrcfl,r\ responses hkc salivrtinsthrough a scies of.liffcrcnr stinlrli.Although t|e dog initialll saliv.tedonlvxit]r tbod prcserLed before jt,it subconsciously began ro sali!ateas i!.ll ivhen ithcard abell r|ar hadprclioust). becD souD(led \rhenererthcre lras preseDtrtior of food.Sometiow, nr.egardless ol wheth$tbod was in ffont ofit, as loDg as ir|eard the ircll souDd the dog wouldsalivatc a u tomatically. Xlosrpopularl)' kDoi{n as PavloviancoDditionhg, his theorjcs on howpeople could beconditioned i ntocertain behaviours withthe right stimuli led tothe foundation ofmodern psychologyand the philosophy ofthe mind.

33 ER0lDtR PtRSPtfilVts ri. s.i.n.? & r clioun iss,r


36/36

,lE

4

ot

oIo

a

:

:

'::=)J:t:

,l_a..=

::-:a

:.=:

1+4./ a '..,:

.a!!4. _a =i ' a(.a7F>

Xo

ooJooo

!

eI

iE

a

oc

##liger,F.k':r, \- .'\atsi2i!rioE)r

t'' !Eil;i:iFE

E4i;lqI5;9EeF

).'

e

E--=i-Ii;:rz!E|e"ry+;1i:rq ri='tTh-.f = *gi. riFgg'i[Hi=;*u $E :s tPfiri'r'^ ,,;;!o'{ ii,=H B ii=E /'>u '. ,':- 5 rE (n-- -' ';,'l;j 'F' ,,';EF \-''3g ; E cr:E "= :fii15! * - El*H=: R ;f ii:=5 = 1-;; Y:H :r- , ;E-..;....................

rrr I tl tl rl lt lr L i I l!

t'l .l 5sgBE6I F ? nt;*:iri.-fi 'Et$a+3l*r\ I 48-f A:3i ^ I 1&3eFgs I ag:!cF= I srE+gs= I c6EEeqE E ;;E:C4I = 1d":;:= E rSfi**i= ^ r*:B;A e En3ii

= ;t?:E gFEsi_ r +4! _*iq i,:sE 'fiSztlit :i .*eor I IEF= E-,E r g-ciE-ib g:'EH-+ =E

D$geIFEE

$ngd EE= {! =+-: qEi-;E.{4eFiz: + =t'FEFir'el:;!T:::::::3:,i

img bp sci&religion

Documents