[ Bottom of page | Harvard Seminar on Environmental Values Home Page | Environmental Ethics Home Page
University Committee on Environment | Harvard Home Page ] 

---

       Our civilization is built upon the foundation of science and its utilitarian offspring, technology. The gifts of science have eased the scourge of disease and illness, substantially expanded the span of human lives, and for many, have eased our labor, ended our hunger and provided a cornucopia of consumer wonders. They have enabled humans to penetrate outer space and into the heart of the atom and to begin unraveling the secrets of life itself. It is little wonder that many ” have regarded science as the repository of “the true and therefore the good.

       Modern science emerged out of the humanism of the Enlightenment. Francis Bacon, a father of modern science claimed that "the world was made for man, not man for the world." Science was to be a weapon to conquer a harsh and threatening nature, to tame the natural world for the service of humanity. Even at the close of the 20th century, many practitioners of science were talking of the continuing need to harness nature to the service of humans.

       By now, however, it has become painfully clear that we have harnessed too much nature and that unintended byproducts of science and technology are threatening the viability of the natural world and, therefore, the welfare of humans. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki it became inescapable that science can be an instrument of evil as well as good.

       For the sake of our posterity, therefore, it has become imperative to reconsider the role of science and scientists in our civilization. As a growing number of scientists have recognized, their work now must concentrate not on conquering and controlling nature but on preserving and restoring nature. And because the harm that science can inflict on the natural world and its inhabitants, we must now think about a workable system of governance for science. Because the consequences of the scientific enterprise have become so complex and potentially so ruinous, decisions about the scientific priorities and the deployment of science and technology can no longer be left entirely to the scientific elite—nor the the corporations that pay for much of our science nor to government officials who are often under pressures that cause them to act against the public good.

       A solution that is emerging from both without and within the scientific community is the democratization of science—of a system that allows a broad range of stakeholders in the scientific enterprise, including communities and consumers, to have a voice in decisions about the priorities and deployment of science and technology.

[ Top of page | Harvard Seminar on Environmental Values Home Page | Environmental Ethics Home Page
University Committee on Environment | Harvard Home Page ]