We all agree that we want a more sustainable society and that we all have a part to play in making that come about. Well, most of us do anyway.
Do scientists and technologists have a special responsibility to the planet? After all it's their work that has enabled the creation of some of the most environmentally damaging practices in human history.
What would you think of an attempt to campaign for scientists to vow not to do ecological harm by pushing for, specifically, a "pledge to be introduced by which all scientists and technologists will promise to respect the Earth and life upon it."?
I'd like to find out your views so I'm launching a poll (which you can find in this post and in the right hand column) and I'd consider it a favour if you'd take a couple of seconds to let me know what you think.
I'm going to stay out of this conversation because I'd like to know your views without skewing them, but feel free to discuss the idea in the comments as well as voting. Thank you.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
New Poll: Vow of Science
Labels: Bad Science, Environment, Poll
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Annie Leonard and co. (
Adrienne Mayor (
Ed Howker and Shiv Malik
Floella Benjamin (
Mark Watson (
Tim Jackson (
David Wilson (
Clive Lord (
Nickie Roberts
6 comments:
I'm not going to vote, it's the wrong question.
We are Human, someone is going to open Pandora's Box.
The real question is how do we deal with it?
I think this is an appalling idea - the concept of making scientists sign pledges? We have enough trouble defending freedom of speech and academic freedom at the moment without having to force certain 'acceptable' views on scientists.
I didn't think about the freedom of speech aspect.
Better is a socialist economy, with green technology in its planning.
Should quacks and woo-merchants have to sign this pledge, or is it only a concern for the truth that is so dangerous?
Or to put it another way: if somebody didn't sign this pledge, which particular standards of scientific rigour would they not be allowed to adhere to in their work?
Oh, I have to come out!
I'm totally opposed to the idea of a pledge and I think Joe and VandF make very good points.
The whole idea of a pledge (which implies that if you don't sign it there will be problems for you) I find utterly abhorent. What's wrong with regulation and legislation to prevent abuses?
The reason why I ask is that for the next six months this policy is stuck in the Green Party's manifesto... thankfully it should be gone by the general election (I hope so anyway) but I wanted to get a sounding of whether people are for it or not.
Strangely of those who've voted so far there are still a few in favour - I'd love to hear you arguments for!
Post a Comment