Last column I painted a grim picture of science’s dark side. A trend toward diabolical creativity began with the atom bomb in 1945 and has only accelerated since then. But it’s not just weapons of mechanized death that cause the problem. Science has long demanded that it be separate from ordinary morality. Medicine marches on unscathed after a drug like Thalidomide produces thousands of deformed babies. Pesticides march on after the serious ecological damage of DDT. Surgeries that have never been properly tested, like the radical mastectomy, thrive as standard practice for decades.
Is amoral science the same as good science?
Almost every scientist thinks so. Their rationale is that injecting issues of right and wrong impedes the free flow of ideas and stifles progress. One never knows where a new discovery will lead, and so judging it in advance may block a tremendous benefit somewhere down the road. As proof, one can point to the suppression of stem-cell research under the Bush administration, which was an irrational decision based on narrow religious values. When President Obama wiped that ban off the books in his first few days in office, it was undoubtedly the right thing to do.
But was it really the same with the atom bomb, DDT, and a host of toxic chemicals still seeping into the soil from various industrial processes? Harm isn’t that hard to predict, and yet out of fear and arrogance, science insists on its right to develop any and every technology that can be imagined. The future holds the dark promise of weapons and toxins worse than anything we have today. When the government bans one dangerous innovation, that simply spurs researchers to invent the next drug, insecticide, or artificial hormone that will elude regulators.
Now that I have recapitulated the grim picture, what can we do about it?
As part of President Obama’s call to a new sense of responsibility, science needs to become more humane, safe, cautious, and humble. There is value in living with Nature and nurturing the planet — almost everyone now agrees — but how can we nurture anything while at the same time threatening life on Earth through toxic technologies?
The big mistake that science has made is leaving out the human factor. In the name of objectivity, science has forgotten subjectivity, or turned it into an enemy. The minute you bring up a simple fact, that every scientist is deeply involved as a human being with his research, skeptics accuse you of being on the side of superstition and charlatanism. That’s like saying that if you point out flaws in the Church, you are an atheist.
Science is deeply subjective. Researchers have goals based on personal values. They are driven by competition, money, status, and prestige. No one can reasonably dispute that. By the same token, scientists know when they are in disturbing territory. The inventors of the atomic bomb tried to suppress their fears, and when the weapon turned out to be unimaginably worse than anyone ever supposed, many physicists felt deep pangs of regret for moving the world into a new age of destruction and terror. Yet the ethos of amorality forced them to move ahead, as if science automatically outweighs all human objections.
Today we have committees on scientific ethics, but these dispense very weak tea, little more than a wringing of hands. The general pattern is that a technology is developed first and worried about afterwards, when it’s too late. Few people thinks it’s right to clone human beings, for example, but we all sit on our hands waiting for that shoe to drop. As surely it will. It’s only a matter of time before the first cloned baby is plastered across the front pages of the tabloids. Just as it’s only a matter of time before the next toxic spill, the next horrifying bomb, the next deadly side effect of drugs.
We need to realize that the subjective side of science is just as important as the objective side. When researchers come to a dangerous area, they rationalize that if they don’t proceed forward, a competitor in Europe, Korea, or Japan will get there first. But that’s like saying that a person should shoplift in the department store because someone else will, or that one should shoot down the enemy because the next soldier will. Moral choices are always personal, and the big problem isn’t who is going to shoot the enemy but why anybody should.
Why should anybody pursue diabolical creativity? I know there are gray areas where one can’t make a clear moral choice. Yet the truth is that chemical companies, the pharmaceutical giants, and the weapons industry march through moral barricades that would stop any ethical person. Weapons of mechanized death are wrong to begin with. So is the cult of new and ever more risky drugs. For every advance on the dark side of science, something better is abandoned. Wholesale reliance on pesticides and chemical fertilizers means that you have abandoned taking care of the environment. The unstoppable flood of pharmaceuticals fosters the abandonment of natural medicine, prevention, and wellness. So before we continue to worship blindly at the altar of scientific progress, we need to stop and consider what kind of existence we actually want 20, 30, 50 years from now. The moral choices we make today will determine how healthy the planet is tomorrow. In other words, science can’t be given immunity from the shift in values that is happening this very moment.
About Deepak Chopra
Time Magazine heralded Deepak Chopra as one of the 100 heroes and icons of the century, and credited him as "the poet-prophet of alternative medicine." Entertainment Weekly described Deepak Chopra as "Hollywood's man of the moment, one of publishing's best-selling and most prolific self-help authors." He is the author of more than 50 books and more than 100 audio, video and CD-Rom titles. He has been published on every continent and in dozens of languages. Fifteen of his books have landed on the New York Times Best-seller list. Toastmaster International recognized him as one of the top five outstanding speakers in the world. Through his over two decades of work since leaving his medical practice, Deepak continues to revolutionize common wisdom about the crucial connection between body, mind, spirit, and healing. His mission of "bridging the technological miracles of the west with the wisdom of the east" remains his thrust and provides the basis for his recognition as one of India's historically greatest ambassadors to the west. Chopra has been a keynote speaker at several academic institutions including Harvard Medical School, Harvard Business School, Harvard Divinity School, Kellogg School of Management, Stanford Business School and Wharton.His latest book is "Reinventing the Body, Resurrecting the Soul."Subscribe
Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.
Dear Dr. Chopra,
But I thought Raelians and the Co. (Clonaid) already claim that they have cloned the first human succesfully.
With all due respect your article though addresses the need to change the diabolical scientific ways – it doesn't exactly say how one should go on about doing it.
I think clearly crafted strategic scientific initiatives have to be taken to facilitate the shift.
Your thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated !
Thank you and Best Regards
~ Ruch ~
Power Shift '09
http://www.powershift09.org/About
In the middle of our new administration's first 100 days, Power Shift 2009 will bring 10,000 young people to Washington to hold our elected officials accountable for rebuilding our economy and reclaiming our future through bold climate and clean energy policy.
From February 27th to March 2nd, 2009 young people from across the country will converge on Washington D.C. to take a message of bold, comprehensive and immediate federal climate action to Capitol Hill. We will leverage the momentum we built locally through the Campus Climate Challenge, at our first national mobilization Power Shift 07, and our electoral engagement campaign Power Vote to pressure our political leaders to take the action our generation and our future demands.
Our window of opportunity is short; the first months of the new administration are critical in achieving significant, lasting changes. We must use the time we have to redefine what is politically or financially feasible and achieve what is scientifically and economically necessary to safeguard our future. Our political moment is now and we must not let it pass us by.
====================
Also have a look at: Talks Jamais Cascio: Tools for building a better world
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jamais_cascio_…
Dear Deepak,
Most scientists are pure materialists, they do not believe that spirit is a real "substance". Many people who are spiritual do not have anything to do with science and do not understand science. In order to change to what you describe so well is for there to be a group of people who live in both the world of science and the world of spirit and are able to integrate the two. One of these is Dr. Mario Beauregarde author of The Spiritual Brain.
Indeed the purpose of my book Everywoman a Goddess: Everyman a Hero in Her Service is to integrate thinking that is currently separated in most people's brains. This isolation and separation into domains that do not interact is the cause of what you describe.
The cure is to seach for the Truth with a capital T. It is my belief based on my experience that integrating science, spirituality and sexuality is necessary to make the great leap forward in evolutionary thinking.
love and light,
Stuart
http://stuartmarkberlin.com http://heroinherservice.blogspot.com
resrchmd@aol.com
I agree with you totally Stuart… change is inevitable as we are all creative creatures. The question is a balance of the evolution of science, spirituality, psychological development, etc. If one soars ahead without any True spiritual development, the result will be greed, destruction, death, etc.
Right now on the internet, there is a big business going on with The Law of Intention. I notice that all of the spiritual teachers have the same goal, to enlighten others. My question is, this may seem like a good thing to do, but perhaps it has it's destructive side also.
For example, if someone gets ahold of "The Secret" and creates all kinds of wealth and happiness for themselves and then uses it to control others like many of the wealthy do… does that not have the same potential of great harm or good as the discovery of splitting the atom? To make the assumption that just because it is a spiritual teaching it is good, may be a wrong assumption… just look at the destruction that the intention of the church has caused. The church does many wonderful things, and at the same time takes away personal freedom using fear and guilt tactics. That is soul stripping.
I believe that Einstein knew this very well. Whenever any kind of discovery of how to tap into power, whether it be physical or spiritual has the potential to do great harm or good. The question on this depends on the user. How psychologically and spiritually is the user? All people have the capacity to rationalize to justify their misuse of power. It takes a highly developed spiritual person to accept the fact that what they intend to create, even if it is peace on earth may have a destructive backfire just because some of the people will use spiritual tools for destruction.
Maybe it is true… good intentions can pave the way to hell… or heaven… depending on the spiritual evolution of the critical mass.
I have no control over the underdeveloped. So now what?
There is the League of New Scientists quite a surprising turn about. http://skeptic.me
The speak of scientific heresy http://skeptic.me/scientific_heresy.htm
Sheryll > also couldn't these laws intetnionally used in such a way that negative consequences are brought to others even if it is not through acquisition of wealth and power and thus controling the rest of the masses…
http://www.urbanrevision.com/ask-an-expert/new-bu…
Exerpt
Sustainability and innovation are inextricably linked. Without the will and skill to think beyond the traditional boundaries, vast economic opportunities may be lost while pressing social and environmental problems remain unsolved.
I think there are many great and creative people with opportunities to shift a paradigm with logic, incentives and creative innovation. My question is… how to stop the greed and power of any society, due to the lack of spiritual development. Paradigm shift takes time. What shall we do with the ones resistant to change, holding onto everything, just for the sake of holding on, whether do to fear or greed. They are also very "creative" to fulfill their own selfish desires. I agree with everthing you propose Margot. I am an idealist. I am not afraid of the powerful, I just don't understand how we can shift a whole society to use our discoveries wisely. Punishment? Incentives… as we have seen; give some corporations and inch and they will take a mile. Police them… government red tape has proven very wasteful and costly. Believe me, I am a Physical Therapist, and half of my day is filling out Medicare forms to justify my treatment.
I thnk the point Deepak is trying to make is, how can one support the discovery of science, knowing full well of the destructive consequences it may also produce. I say the answer is in psychology… basic behavioral tools are what one uses to raise a child… and that's what abusers of power are: grown ups acting like selfish 2 year olds. I don't know how to promote psychological change in one adult let alone a corporation of them. If lucky, we'll catch their hand in the cookie jar… like Enron. Policing and punishing take a lot of resources of time and money.
at as replica watches naturally as fake watches possible, so have rolex brown rather rolex watches than white fake rolex rice wholegrain replica rolex bread rather replica than white etc watches This group replica watch includes breakfast cereals wholesale watches pasta