Since 2006, the Seed Revolutionary Minds series has identified over 50 individuals who are breaking the barriers between science and art, architecture, design, and communication—the interpreters, the game changers, the re-envisionaries.
Earlier this year, we posed three questions to these Revolutionary Minds, asking them to reflect on the role of science in relation to pressing global issues and how a cross-disciplinary approach to problem solving might advise them. We will post their responses here, over the course of the next three months, and invite additional responses from ScienceBloggers. We'd love to hear your comments and feedback, too.
So, without further ado, the first question:
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?
- Log in to post comments
Science needs to bring it's scientific lens to bear on itself. The main force in the world right now, isn't what science will do. The reality of focusing any lens to bear on the state of this environment is, what will each individual do. Including each scientist.
Can science rise up above itself and give an honest assessment, an objective assessment, of what it is doing? There are some noticable events occuring, the drum beat of mass danger is an increasing reality to many people who live on this earth. Daily, billions of people wake up and live their lives. Lives that they struggle to survive in. Few of these billions are waiting for the spot light of science to shine on them, because survival has a higher rating on the daily things to do list.
These days ahead science does have a magnificant role to play. The reality may well be, that the rewards recieved by the most effective scientist, may be in balance to the personal cost of doing what will have to be done.
Every scientist who sees the strom ahead, in weather, medicine, food supplies, desease, geology, astrophysics, and on and on. Knows that, it's on it's way. The needs will become greater, the setbacks greater, the losses greater,the rewards less for those who make the greatest difference.
The scientific lens finely tuned, after objective assessment, may best be focused on those who have to survive in this world, against great odds. Science will have to be able to function while being overwhelmed.
There are many conditions that need treating in the world, and it is well that scientists continue to focus on all of them. While I agree that the fight for survival is of large magnitude, I would also hope that people and scientists consider survival in relation to the question, "What will we survive as?"
Working with a new theory of evolution, as I do (search: girasas), leads me to believe that we will be able to survive on earth as something other than the humans we know now. If we are allowed to change - and encouraged to change - in a feasible direction, the great scientific minds of our age, will best focus on assessing how this change can occur harmoniously.
While evolution is a marvelous mechanism for change, when it comes to our own human evolution, we do not want to be considered as helpless pigeons, but as engineers, calculating each step of our change into something greater than human.
Science needs to maintain and protect its role as the worldwide standard method for determining the difference between what is real and actionable and what is superstitious and imaginary. Religion/superstition-based influence over government activities and policy-making and societal opinion-forming will represent ongoing challenges to the supremacy of the scientific method in the study, understanding, control, and operation of human endeavors.
Science will also have to address a laundry list of needs having to do with human survival and prosperity in the years and decades to come. A few things scientists will have fun with in the near future:
⢠maintaining the health of the people who already exist while fostering worldwide human population self-control
⢠promoting access to economic opportunity for large numbers of people (even given successful population control), with methods to correct against unbridled growth, pollution, resource depletion (including water, food, land use), and other ecology-damaging habits
⢠discovering and delivering sustainable, renewable energy resources and inventing new energy-thrifty technologies
⢠continuing to study what makes the earth tick via the basic sciences and engineering: geology, biology, genetics, physics, chemistry, marine science, climatology, cosmology, etc.
⢠encouraging an enhanced study of the human brain and mind with a goal toward finding out what makes us tick
As much of a hot-time party sending people to Mars would be, it's not practicable at this time. Instead, NASA should be permitted to do the following:
⢠scrap the space shuttle and space station and forget about most manned space flightsâfor the time-being
⢠vigorously develop follow-up technologies to replace the Hubble telescope, to be used to explore the universe and for the next bullet point...
⢠ramp up tracking of near-earth asteroids and other large objects that threaten to smash into us, and create methods to avoid such catastrophes
⢠develop small, light, powerful, unmanned craft that can be sent to the other planets and their satellites, either for orbiting data collection, or, as with the Mars Rover, to land and explore robotically. Forget about physically exploring anything outside the solar system, for the time-being.
⢠direct NASA resources to improved study the earth's geology, geography, biosphere/atmosphere, climate
Good luck, scientists!