I'm suffering through a wretched cold at the moment, which will limit my blogging activity. If you're looking for something to do, though, you might want to check out the Revolutionary Minds blog set up by the Corporate Masters. This is basically a short-form online version of a feature from Seed, in which they ask smart people to discuss Big Questions-- a more limited version of those Edge questions that John Brockman does every year.
The current question is:
The boundaries of science are continually expanding as scientists become increasingly integral to finding solutions for larger social issues, such as poverty, conflict, financial crises, etc. On what specific issue/problem do you feel we need to bring the scientific lens to bear?
The answers range from localizing energy production to improving funding for the arts (it's not quite as much a non sequitur as you might think).
So, it's something to check out while my pseudoephedrine and I have a groggy day.
- Log in to post comments
1) Science does not "solve" social issues any more than a wrench bonds parts.
2) The boundaries of science are violently contracting. Grant funding assures the young and creative are allowed to starve. All discovery is insubordination, for it does not appear in a PERT chart or budget. Zero risk! Senior faculty are dependable oxen.
3) Uncle Al's cynical counter to Enviro-whiners' sustainable poverty was "burn algae." Sonofagun if they didn't take him up on it. Faith must oppose reality, for if it were empirical what faith would be required?
4) After all the massively subsidized activism, studies, White papers, environmental impact reports, plans, and press releases... who ever does the work? Nobody.
5) Scientists are a thin ribbon wrapping the package. Diversity is the content! How splendiferously accoutered are our emperors.