Providing Safeguards or Playing Nero
Those who read this page are fully aware that in matters of the quality of life, chemistry is as much a part of the problem as it is a source of the solution. The creation and formulation of "better things" have made and will continue to make for better livine. but onlv a t a rice. For the most Dart and for many the p&e, until ricentl;, has not been prohigitively high, and even with the inconveniences of ~ollution.toxic suhstances in theenvironment, energyshor&gesanddrugahuse, the puhlic in aeneral has heen willine: nor onlv to pas the price, hut-to expect an uninterrupted flow of even better things. Included in this expectation, however, is the not always tacit assumption that each technological advance will he accompanied by a corresponding increase in environmental and public health and safety. The message from the public is strong and clear: we expect the creators of the technology to provide the requisite safeguards for the health and safety of the society in the short term without fail. and in the lone term as far as vision and intelligence cnn reasonably project. There is evidencr that the eovernment and the technulorical community are taking necessary steps to provide sho2term safeeuards. Creation of the EPA, OSHA and TOSCA agencies with regulatory powers, formation of the Office of Technology Assessment, which has developed assessments of over l ~ ~ t e c h n o l o ~ini efive s years, assumption by leading industries of far greater responsibility for product and environmental quality than ever before, organization of scientific seminars to discuss possible limitations on DNA research, all illustrate that the public's message has been heard and is understood. Although there is a question of when or whether the creators of technology, the scientists, engineers and inventors can accept the constraint of ~rovidinereauisite safeenards to accompany their discoveries, and i h e n b r whether'the academic training of potential creators of technology will include learning to work under such constraints, the gene of social responsibility for technological creation has been activated in our culture; its expression in providing short-term safeguards is clearly, if not always ungrudgingly, evident. A far greater problem, and one that requires all the intelligence and concentration we can muster, is that of providing enough long-term safeguards that future generations can choose among desirable options rather than being compelled to manage only what is inevitable. Many feel there are more good reasons for shunning this problem than for embracing it. Unfortunately, we run the risk of precipitating ecological and social catastrophes of monstrous proportions if we ignore it. The competencies required in dealing with the problem include: a) an uncommon understanding of science, and most particularly of the forces acting in the biosphere; b) an equally uncommon understanding of the nature of our society, and most particularly of the forces that can bring about constructive change in a democracy; c) an appreciation of the role and importance of uncertainty a t this stage in the life of Western civilization. Because of their unique appreciation of the forces acting in nature and their realization of the extent to which the technologies used to support our populations tend to pene-
trate nature or perturb the balance among natural forces, scientists and engineers are the only members of the society who cannot be excused from making continuing and positive contributions toward providing long-term safeguards for environmental and nublic health and safetv. In order to make such contributions, typical or potential sc;entists or engineers mav have to learn a bit more science and a lot more sociolow than they hargained for. One realits thw must confront earls is tht deeds . . ingrained . for short-term interests over long-term cultural uncertainties. Perhaps because in the past new technologies did not seem to entail the risks of some contemporary technologies, and perhaps because in a democracy, short-term interests exert such a powerful pull on voters and politicians, the society perennially suffers from a "tyranny of small decisions." Overcoming this preference for small decisions is complicated by questions of what values should claim priority in develo~ine . .. lone-ranee ,. ,. safeeuards. and how to deal with uncertainty about futurr events. On the matter of values. it is unfortunate hut true that the American government prbvides no structure in which it is noliticallv safe to eneaee in debate over what is best. Those who do so can only earn blame in the political arena as they arouse the scorn of vested interests. There is no institution or force on the side of long-term goals marshalled against the lobbies of short-term interests. Ho~efullvthe threat ofecological or social disasters caused by &indle& uses of technology can be communicated with enough cogency . . to make possible the dev(:lopment of some essential long-rnnge safegunrds. Uncertainty is nor only a fact ut life, it is a hnllmark of our age. As such, it no longer can be used as an excuse for failing to assume the ethical burden of goal-setting or long-range ulannine that is criticallv incumbent uDon our eeneration. However, new attitudes for perceiving and coping with uncertaintv must be develoned and built exnlicitlsinto our social interactions and institutions. We must learn, for example, to acceut error a s an inevitable conseauence of contribution. and to use it a s a vehicle l'or learning. \Ye must find waysof living with role stress and of allowing for its effects on others, realLing that this too is inevitable i f individuals or groups are honest about the uncertainti6 they are dealing with. R'e most recognize that only hg having the confidenr~to allow themselves to ndmit uncertainty can indi\kIuals and institutions estahlish the attitudes fur re-examining experience and interpreting rhe present that will enal~lethem to respond to the ch&eneeof the future The public is right in expecting the creators of technology to nrovide the reauisite safeeuards for environmental and pu6~ichealth and safety to"accompany new or improved technologies. Unless this is done effectively-which means that present and future scientists and engineers must accept the obligation and develop the skills to do it successfully-Western civilization well might give a repeat performance of the Nero fiddling while Rome burns drama. In the modern rendition, a component of our most able minds-our scientists, engineers and teachers of science-might be cast in the role of the one factor in the society that could have prevented catastrophe but didn't. WTL Volume 55. Number 2. February 1978 1 71
