Below, Michelle Borkin responds to the 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?
Advances in science and computing have extraordinary potential to address social issues around the globe. The challenge is making sure there are people dedicated to leverage the newest scientific advances and make them applicable and affordable to the cause at hand. I feel there is particular potential in the realm of making basic, yet inexpensive, technology available to developing regions in order to help fight poverty and disease. This idea is not a dream, but an emerging reality. I was recently honored to meet at the TEDGlobal 2009 conference a number of amazing researchers and entrepreneurs working hard towards this goal.
For example, Frederick Balagadde, a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National laboratory, has applied groundbreaking microfluidics techniques to develop a diagnostic system a cubic-inch in size that can diagnose dozens of diseases including HIV for a fraction of the current cost (http://balagadde.org/). Peter Hass, founder of AIDG (Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group), is working to make basic amenities such as electricity and clean water available through innovative technological applications and outreach (http://www.aidg.org/). William Kamkwamba, an inventor and student in Africa, built a windmill from parts he found in a junkyard in order to provide electricity for his family's home in Malawi and is now working to help other families do the same (http://www.williamkamkwamba.com/). Hopefully scientists and inventors will take the time to sit back, think, and reflect on how their newest discovery can be applied to help society.
- Log in to post comments
Is there room in science and technological advancement for the possible rethinking of what subject and object are in human and instinctual terms? For instance, what happens if by some miracle science discovers how to trick gravity as a field of energy into a partnership where the time between a given particle's kinetic and potential motion becomes as narrow as the flip of a switch? Shouldn't we somehow be ready to take a more broad approach to what we consider American or Russian, black or white, gay or straight when technological advancement could so radically alter most if not all current human understanding?
For advancement to be meaningful on all fronts shouldn't it impact all levels of knowledge and experience almost at the same time?
How about ancient technology (well, implemented with the latest gizmos)? Need antibiotics? What can be cheaper than a government-run not-for-profit drugs lab producing drugs which are no longer under patent restrictions?
Small quantities of anything cost a fortune to make, with most money spent on the development and testing. Once you know something works it can be created relatively cheaply in large numbers. Diddling with insignificant quantities here and there is not likely to make a big difference to most of the population.