EDITORIAL
What they didn't hear Self-styled activists at Chicago meeting of AAAS roused rabble but didn't really accomplish much for their "cause"
T
hey may call themselves "scientists" and "engineers." They may shout "science for the people." They may proclaim concern for all of man's current ills. And they may dub themselves saviors of mankind. But their recent activities in Chicago clearly brand them as hooligans and clowns, if not slobs, with a marked penchant for all the classic bullyboy tactics. We're referring, of course, to those abusive elements at the year-end meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science who seemed bent on substituting discord and disruption for dialogue, debate, and discussion, thereby making a travesty of legitimate dissent. To be sure, not all dissenters at Chicago were of such ilk. But the senseless shenanigans of a few lessen chances for any reform that may be needed. Just what these buffoons, who fancy themselves activists, hoped to achieve is hard to understand. They did attract considerable attention and publicity. And although some of our friends and detractors feel that we should not dignify such a breed and its antics with coverage ( ignore it and it will go away), we disagree. For the surest way to expose this sort of fraud is to illuminate it and show it for what it is. At any rate, some of the goings-on in Chicago were enough—well, were enough to make you want to . . . er . . . uh . . . jab someone with a . . . uh . . . knitting needle, or something. Ironically, these self-styled dissidents succeeded in thwarting an eminent chemist whose planned address contained much that you would think might appeal to those genuinely concerned with contemporary problems and the role of science in helping to solve them. But they didn't want to hear; and barred others from hearing. It was a pity, for Glenn Seaborg, newly elected president of AAAS, had prepared one of his more eloquent talks for the occasion. What conference attendees didn't hear was a ringing call to scientists and engineers to reorder and refurbish their thinking before the end of this century. "What should be our orientation in the decades
ahead, our outlook and aims, and what might we expect to accomplish?" Dr. Seaborg wrote. ". . . we can realize that all sciences, all disciplines, are in the state of becoming one science and that it is the missing pieces of this huge puzzle of physical reality that we must search out and put into their proper place," he says. And elsewhere in the remarks: "But in learning who we are and trying to assess where we want to go we cannot regard science merely as a means to those ends or disregard it until we agree on those ends. Some would do this. They would set science aside, saying we must first find our identity and establish our values, then we can turn back to science to see what it can do for us. But life cannot be dealt with that way. We cannot conveniently compartmentalize means and ends." # # # # "We . . . must counteract the pervasive feelings that the world of science is one apart from the world of man, or that we have reached a science saturation point at which we must set science aside while we tend to 'human problems.' No thinking could be more dangerous to science or man than that, because every major problem we face today—whether environmental, educational, social, or political—has important ramifications that somehow involve scientific and technological judgments. . . ." *
•
#
*
*
"We must, within our own ranks, strive for a new unity, direction, and sense of purpose and convey these to the highest level of national and international leadership." Right on, Dr. Seaborg.
(Above quotes are excerpts from remarks prepared for presentation on Dec. 30, 1970, at the 1970 meeting of AAAS.)
C&EN editorials are signed and represent only the views of the signer. Unless stated to the contrary they do not represent the official position of the American Chemical Society. Bather they are aimed at focusing attention on some controversial point, at sparldng intelligent discussion, at raising legitimate questions. JAN. 11, 1971 C&EN 5
