Science: responsability for all
Ever since the Neolithic, Man has modified the natural envi-ronment in which the human species first came into exis-tence. The recent acceleration in the growth of science and technology has given rise to a concomitant increase in the rate of alteration of the natural environment, with both posi-tive and negative consequences for humanity itself.
As the life of every individual is gradually modified, each one is directly or indirectly responsible for the use of the op-portunities offered by science and technology. The proper exercise of this responsability would be the hallmark of a true democracy.
Yet it seems we are far from this kind of democracy. As pointed out by Eleanor Baum in her first presidential adress to the New York Academy of Sciences, politicians do not as-sume responsability for the decisions that affect the results of science and technology, nor for the people they repre-sent. Nor are scientists and factory managers mindful of the consequences of this accelerated transformation of the nat-ural environment.
The understanding of science - scientific literacy for all - appears to be unattainable, as discussions by Morris Shamos and others have shown. Furthermore, the ability to foresee the consequences of relentless scientific progress, and the maintenance of an ethical attitude to their work are not universal qualities among scientists. The main interest of the politicians often seems to be merely to remain in power.
It is therefore of the utmost urgency that humanity should become progressively aware of the reality of our time. This reality offers a broad range of possibilities for good and bad, which are inextricably linked. The achievement of some of these possibilities is indeed the result of both individual and collective behaviour. The choice between two opportunities determines the consequence of our actions. Science is the responsability for all.
Editor
