Comments on: Biopolitics for the 21st Century http://2020science.org/2009/12/14/darnovsky/ Providing a clear perspective on developing science and technology responsibly Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:00:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Hilary Sutcliffe http://2020science.org/2009/12/14/darnovsky/#comment-40151 Hilary Sutcliffe Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:28:32 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=2545#comment-40151 Indeed Ruth, but not just social scientists, that's part of the problem. Social scientists are in their own little theoretical land half the time too, unconnected and speaking a language that most of us don't understand. It's got to be all of us - business people, politicians, the public, ngos, the media and scientists of all shapes and forms need to engage properly instead of sniping at each other from the sidelines. Trouble is, who will pay for the engagement? It needs to be part of everyone's day job, but that's an uphill battle in itself. Indeed Ruth, but not just social scientists, that’s part of the problem. Social scientists are in their own little theoretical land half the time too, unconnected and speaking a language that most of us don’t understand. It’s got to be all of us – business people, politicians, the public, ngos, the media and scientists of all shapes and forms need to engage properly instead of sniping at each other from the sidelines.

Trouble is, who will pay for the engagement? It needs to be part of everyone’s day job, but that’s an uphill battle in itself.

]]> By: Andrew Maynard http://2020science.org/2009/12/14/darnovsky/#comment-40149 Andrew Maynard Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:26:17 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=2545#comment-40149 Agree fully with you Ruth - although the challenges of getting 'hard" and "soft" scientists communicating together, and then saying stuff that is intelligible and relevant to everyone else, are somewhat large. I'm still agog at that motto from the 1933 Chicago World's Fair: "Science Finds, Industry Applies, Man Conforms.” - was this accepted by people back in 1933, or was it a classic case of the "hard" scientists forgetting to talk to the "soft" scientists? Would be interesting to know more... Agree fully with you Ruth – although the challenges of getting ‘hard” and “soft” scientists communicating together, and then saying stuff that is intelligible and relevant to everyone else, are somewhat large.

I’m still agog at that motto from the 1933 Chicago World’s Fair: “Science Finds, Industry Applies, Man Conforms.” – was this accepted by people back in 1933, or was it a classic case of the “hard” scientists forgetting to talk to the “soft” scientists? Would be interesting to know more…

]]> By: Andrew Maynard http://2020science.org/2009/12/14/darnovsky/#comment-40146 Andrew Maynard Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:55:10 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=2545#comment-40146 Thanks Hilary, and no problems Re: the "self-promo" :-) Thanks Hilary, and no problems Re: the “self-promo” :-)

]]> By: Ruth Seeley http://2020science.org/2009/12/14/darnovsky/#comment-40144 Ruth Seeley Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:48:58 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=2545#comment-40144 At the turn of the 21st C a senior executive from a major software manufacturer said to me, 'Ruth, most people already have more software than they need <i>or will ever learn how to use.</i> This came on the heels of a radio show about the stress constantly learning new software systems was posing for research librarians. So it's not just socially communicative scientists who need to be doing the outreach - the rift between 'real' and social scientists needs to be breached for once and for all, and social scientists need to be involved in the earliest stages of the consultation process - which seems implicit in point three, but isn't explicit. At the turn of the 21st C a senior executive from a major software manufacturer said to me, ‘Ruth, most people already have more software than they need or will ever learn how to use. This came on the heels of a radio show about the stress constantly learning new software systems was posing for research librarians.

So it’s not just socially communicative scientists who need to be doing the outreach – the rift between ‘real’ and social scientists needs to be breached for once and for all, and social scientists need to be involved in the earliest stages of the consultation process – which seems implicit in point three, but isn’t explicit.

]]> By: Hilary Sutcliffe http://2020science.org/2009/12/14/darnovsky/#comment-40139 Hilary Sutcliffe Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:24:50 +0000 http://2020science.org/?p=2545#comment-40139 Excellent start to the guest blog series! Agree wholeheartedly with pretty much all of what is said here. We are looking at this area in the UK/EU too, bringing together different stakeholder perspectives in a new 'action tank' type organisation to consider these very issues. Our initial discussions with stakeholders agree with the need for such Principles as you outline Marcy. The debates end up with the obvious questions though - how do these Principles get developed globally which is what is really required? Who will take notice? And, of course, who will pay for the development and outreach process! Hmm! So look out for a new UK/EU organisation in the New Year, called: Matter - making new technologies work for us all. A scoop for Andrew who has been very helpful in giving us his input. Anyone wants a chat about the concept and the development of an international network of us folks who agree with the need for such Principles, do send me an email to hilary@responsiblenanoforum.org. Send one too if you think it's a load of old cobblers! Sorry for the self-promo Andrew, but looking forward to the other blogs! Excellent start to the guest blog series!

Agree wholeheartedly with pretty much all of what is said here. We are looking at this area in the UK/EU too, bringing together different stakeholder perspectives in a new ‘action tank’ type organisation to consider these very issues. Our initial discussions with stakeholders agree with the need for such Principles as you outline Marcy. The debates end up with the obvious questions though – how do these Principles get developed globally which is what is really required? Who will take notice? And, of course, who will pay for the development and outreach process! Hmm!

So look out for a new UK/EU organisation in the New Year, called: Matter – making new technologies work for us all. A scoop for Andrew who has been very helpful in giving us his input. Anyone wants a chat about the concept and the development of an international network of us folks who agree with the need for such Principles, do send me an email to hilary@responsiblenanoforum.org. Send one too if you think it’s a load of old cobblers!

Sorry for the self-promo Andrew, but looking forward to the other blogs!

]]>