Sunday, September 28, 2008

This is my GP essay, which I failed, and am very SORE over. -.-

‘Science promises but rarely delivers.’ How far do you agree?

The statement that ‘science promises but rarely delivers’ highlights the misplaced notion in society that, in the face of an advance and sophisticated world, science is omnipotent and must be held in high regard as the key to solving many if not all of humanity’s problems. This sets the parameters for my discussions as we will see that science does not innately hold the key to all of humanity’s problems, much less deliver them. The fact is that in an increasingly technologically advance and globalize world, the remarkable successes that science has have been publicized and paraded as a tribute to humanity’s prowess and for advertising purposes more than anything else. This continual embellishment of science has subtly conditioned us into thinking that science holds limitless possibilities and has hence since then been placed upon a pedestal as a hope for a better future. However we must realize that although science can and has brought us many benefits, it can also bring much harm as well.

Let us now discuss the impacts of one of the greatest scientific achievements science has brought to us, the Manhattan Project and its discovery of nuclear power. This project was initially assumed by the Americans and seen as an imperative during World War II as the Americans were concerned over rumors that Hitler could have developed the bomb before they did. As such, they pumped in millions into the research project and when the atomic bomb was finally created and successfully tested in the ‘trinity’, it was perceived as a solution to bring peace via deterrence. Indeed it fulfilled its promise of ending the war as the dropping of the two atomic bombs, fat man and little boy, on Nagasaki and Hiroshima led to the unconditional surrender by the Japanese. However, the promise of peace was never truly fulfilled. Instead, once the world had known about the existence of such a powerful weapon of mass destruction, a power struggle ensued between the Russians and the Allies whereby the two superpowers started hording nuclear weapons, ready to unleash annihilation upon each other at the blink of an eye. This period known as the Cold War continues to stand as a milestone in the anneals of history to serve as a reminder of the massive uncertainty and psychological tumult that humanity once faced. Thus, it is clearly seen in this instance that science inherently fails to deliver its promise of peace as the alleged ‘peace’ it brought was only at the prima facie. Instead, it brought more contention and strive that led to international disharmony and widespread fear. Hence, in this instance, I agree that science has not only failed to deliver its promise of peace but that it led to even more disharmony arising.

Another reason why science might have failed to deliver its promises is due to the ineptitude, arrogance and shortsightedness of humankind in applying science appropriately rather than the situation wherein science itself inherently fails. Keeping in perspective that science is merely a neutral tool for humanity to utilize, it is more probable that the times whereby science fails to deliver are times where human flaws in executing the delivery are at fault. Using the previous example of the atomic bomb, the underlying cause of destruction and strive was not due to science itself, but rather the application of it. The fact that the Americans were already bent on using the atomic bomb as a weapon of destruction made science a tool of destruction. Hence, one must first understand the historical and human context in which destruction and the misuse of science arises if we are to avoid wielding science in a manner that brings more problems than solutions. As physicist Freeman Dyson once said, “The reason that (the atomic bomb) was dropped was just that nobody has the courage or the foresight to say no.” He blamed technical arrogance and the illusion of god-like power for overwhelming the common sense of the scientific community. Thus, when humanity is under the spell that we are omnipotent, it could henceforth blind us to our own shortcomings causing us to wave our scientific capabilities in a manner a 5 year-old child might do when showing off his new toys without any thought to the possible consequences. This ultimately ends in impending disaster as illustrated by the misuse of the atomic bomb. Even in today’s context, the notion of being able to ‘playing God’ serves to tantalize biomedical scientists and in some instances, research on stem cells and cloning proceeds for the sake of being able to play God better. Similar to the preliminary stages of the Manhattan Project, therapeutic cloning, negative and even positive eugenics seems to hold much promises and potential future benefits, however if we do not keep our arrogance and common sense in check, we might be looking into Pandora’s box only to find ourselves in a hubristic morass. When that day comes, one cannot blame science for not delivering its promises but only ourselves, for sowing what we have reaped.

Stemming from the field of biomedical sciences, the promises that science could bring could also be impeded from factors such as ethics. Stem cell research itself has infinite possibilities that range from the eradication of chronic genetic and acquired diseases such as Huntington’s, AIDS, cancer and organ failure to the wild idea of immortality, now a theoretical possibility. It speaks of a future Utopian society, whereby positive eugenics and genetic engineering promises super-humans, each individual perfected from birth, as in the show “GATTACA”. However, with all its potential promises and benefits, research in these fields has been largely experimental, slow and cautious. This can be accounted by the nature of biomedical science that involves real living human beings with a soul. In other words, the experiments that are so vital in scientific progress are now implicated with ethical and social issues that encompass complex societal and law systems that serve to preserve the sanctity of life. As such, because experiments could end up as roaring successes or astounding failures that might implicate or even cause the death of a person, ethical issues has principally been the factor that restraints scientific progress and its ability to quickly deliver its potential benefits through its new discoveries that could very well redefine the human. Issues such as whether practicing negative eugenics could lead to the dilution of the human gene pool, the possibility of a homogenized synthetic society, the question of freewill and whether its ethical to kill a fetus are just the tip of the iceberg pertaining to the ethical concerns that plague the scientific community. Unfortunately these concerns do not stop merely at the ethical level but also at the scientific level as risk of epidemics occurring are higher when society is homogenized leading to a potential dystopia. As such, although it serves us well for us to maintain these safeguards, it comes as a trade off with scientific progress and development.

In addition to ethical issues, the scientific limitations, as surprising as it might sound, might also serve as a reason as to why science rarely delivers, or at least why it is slow to do so. This is because limitations in today’s scientific capabilities have led to theories and ideas of what might be remaining largely as conceptual possibilities, and not what is. Hence, massive amounts of research are being pumped into the scientific fields to develop future capabilities that could benefit humanity at large in hope of realizing dreams and exploring new possibilities, and changing them from mere fragments of our imagination into practical and scientific use. However, such research takes time to mature, and discoveries are not made every other day. Hence time goes hand in hand with limited scientific capability that plays as a limiting factor accounting for science’s slow delivery of its promises of a better future.


ANTI-THESIS:
However, one cannot be a Luddite and lampoon science nor turn a blind eye to the endless list of benefits and prosperity that science has already brought to us this day. For example, if one is to look at the green revolution.. blablabla boring bla.

Word of the Day; 1:08 AM