First published on Desicritics.
I believe in this maxim, now more than ever. I believe that a collective of something makes a much, much larger whole. That a little action can change the course of things. Of course it does.
These last 2 days I was a in a forum where there were discussions on ethics in science and technology (s&t) ... so there were these scientists, experts and there were a few of us trying to make sense of it all. These were scientists from various streams - from Life Sciences, Social Sciences, Biologists, Physicists, Information Technology etc.etc. And one got a faint glimpse into a world that otherwise one never gets to look into. One also got another glimpse. A glimpse into the relationships between S&T, Profit and Government. A glimpse of an animal that is Profit+Power that is served by Knowledge (of S&T). It felt odd to see the great being that is Knowledge (Science&Technology), as a dog chained and used by the P+P.
A few months ago, I had had an opportunity to get a glimpse into the world of our powers-that-be - the world of the decision makers, the bureaucrats. I was horrified at the helplessness that was expressed in that forum. At that time I couldn't digest the helplessness in the selling out of our powers-that-be to something which we are not able to clearly see.
It felt like society was addicted to, hooked on the P+P. Like a Cocaine fix, even knowing that it is eating up our insides, we (as a society) serve the addiction, in little and big ways. Somewhere we have lost control and our (society's) addictions (plus its helplessness) have taken over.
I think we really, really, really don't understand the nature of the addiction, the nature of this animal, Profit+Power<-served-by-Knowledge-and-governments. I don't think we really understand how deep the rot is or how rotten the rot that permeates our worlds. Believe me, I have NOTHING against profit. Honest gains from honest efforts. 10%, 20%, 30%... all acceptable. How about 500%? or 1000% or 5000%? And we wouldn't want to know what goes behind making that 1000%.
If we want change, we have to commit to it, with all our strength, with all our will. Because the animal that is Profit+Power<-served-by-Knowledge-and-governments is putting out 100% effort into feeding itself. And once we make this commitment, we can WILL change.
And induce The Butterfly Effect.
And the change is happening. Another World is happening. It is happening because more and more people are discussing issues of equity, justice, plurality, sustainability, choices, rights ... ordinary people, teachers, doctors, scientists, law-makers, bureaucrats, youth groups, women and so on ... more and more people are committing to change, deciding to change.
If change is seen in the span of decades, it is disheartening ... but seen in a span of centuries, one sees a very certain and positive movement towards respect for all. We have come a long, long way from when women were burnt at the husband's pyre, or slaves were whipped in cotton fields, or education was only for a privileged few. We have come a long way from where the only answer came from the gun, where the poor or women could not vote, or religion controlled society, or people could be touched or included based on their caste.
These monsters are still there. These animals still breathe and feed themselves. But slowly, inexorably they are being curtailed. And this happens only because change is demanded - again and again - by people who want change, who are committed to change. Because issues like Ethics in Science & Technology get discussed. Because Right to Information, Shelter, Livelihood and Life become norms.
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Monday, September 7, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
Accountability
Climate Change is an issue of accountability. It starkly has brought out the nature of development so far – as-long-as-i-am-fine-i-don’t-care-about-anything-else attitude. What is happening to the world surpasses the consequences of Nazi holocaust and the Nuclear bomb or the silent but inexorable wiping out of the indigenous communities. It cannot be passed off as collateral damage of Development.
Suddenly, powerful countries, that until now wielded the say in all negotiations (they still do), find themselves uncomfortably pulled up. One sees them squirming (a little arrogantly) at the consequence of the orgy of their consumption. Not that consequences haven’t happened before. Small countries, colonized communities have paid for their greed down the centuries. But now the consequence directly affects them, directly affects all, and the fingers so clearly point to you-did-it. I do realize there is a certain glee within me, when I write this, but I have decided to indulge the glee rather than shamefully cover it up.
One thing must be said about the western, more specifically European communities. Their sense of fairness provides a certain means for little guys to appeal unlike the American community which shows an absence of such chivalry and thus eliminates any possible space for reversals.
And in all this, in all the international negotiations, there is still the how-can-i-get-out-of-the-situation-with-least-amount-of-payment bickering. Admitted in so many words, the responsibility of the State of World is fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the developed community. However, this is spoilt by the now-you-will-continue-to-fuck-up-the-world finger pointing at India and China, and by the fast and furious hustling with CDMs.
One wonders whether Climate Change has taught us anything at all.
Still, if one chooses to focus on the good things, at least accountability has become not-to-be-ignored issue. Accountability which was absent in politics, international politics, is at least being acknowledged.
Accountability. It’s a good thing. It allows us to stand back and take a look at our actions, its consequences on the rest of the world, and gives us an opportunity to correct our course.
Suddenly, powerful countries, that until now wielded the say in all negotiations (they still do), find themselves uncomfortably pulled up. One sees them squirming (a little arrogantly) at the consequence of the orgy of their consumption. Not that consequences haven’t happened before. Small countries, colonized communities have paid for their greed down the centuries. But now the consequence directly affects them, directly affects all, and the fingers so clearly point to you-did-it. I do realize there is a certain glee within me, when I write this, but I have decided to indulge the glee rather than shamefully cover it up.
One thing must be said about the western, more specifically European communities. Their sense of fairness provides a certain means for little guys to appeal unlike the American community which shows an absence of such chivalry and thus eliminates any possible space for reversals.
And in all this, in all the international negotiations, there is still the how-can-i-get-out-of-the-situation-with-least-amount-of-payment bickering. Admitted in so many words, the responsibility of the State of World is fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the developed community. However, this is spoilt by the now-you-will-continue-to-fuck-up-the-world finger pointing at India and China, and by the fast and furious hustling with CDMs.
One wonders whether Climate Change has taught us anything at all.
Still, if one chooses to focus on the good things, at least accountability has become not-to-be-ignored issue. Accountability which was absent in politics, international politics, is at least being acknowledged.
Accountability. It’s a good thing. It allows us to stand back and take a look at our actions, its consequences on the rest of the world, and gives us an opportunity to correct our course.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
“Modern high-tech warfare is designed to remove physical contact:
dropping bombs from 50,000 feet ensures that one does not “feel”
what one does. Modern economic management is similar:..from one’s
luxury hotel, one can callously impose policies about which one
would think twice if one knew the people whose lives one was
destroying.”
- Joseph E. Stiglitz (2002),
Globalization and its Discontents,
Norton, New York
dropping bombs from 50,000 feet ensures that one does not “feel”
what one does. Modern economic management is similar:..from one’s
luxury hotel, one can callously impose policies about which one
would think twice if one knew the people whose lives one was
destroying.”
- Joseph E. Stiglitz (2002),
Globalization and its Discontents,
Norton, New York
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Ethics of Science & Technology
I was making a presentation on the subject of Ethics in Science & Technology (S&T) focussing on the S&T of the Built Environment, focussing further on reconstruction.
When the scientific community conceives and creates an idea, are there any Ethics to it? Is it that every idea finds exploration and expression? Or is there a determining factor that allows some ideas to flower more than the others ? - the classic example being that there is more research and findings for hair-colouring than alternative energy?
Science itself is neutral, or so we would like to think. It is the application of Science and its findings that become instrumentalized to fulfill a hidden agenda which most of the society is not aware of. Or so we would like to think.
But is science neutral? Can it be said that the creation of the atom bomb is innocent? It does not look ethical from any angle. But then this is an example most of us would agree with. But if we start measuring the ethics in the creation of every idea itself, what would we arrive at? What are the ethics in hysterectomy? Or abortion? What about pesticides? ...
I was trying to understand something which my mind was trying to point to. Madhulika, one of the participants in the meeting, finally put the words to it - there are power-relations, not only in the application of S&T, but in the very genesis of the idea, the funding for it, the process of allowing it come to the forefront and become a usable product.
Science & technology do not seem innocent. They seem to be political. In the way the very birth of the idea, it development, application and promotion.
To be explored further ....
When the scientific community conceives and creates an idea, are there any Ethics to it? Is it that every idea finds exploration and expression? Or is there a determining factor that allows some ideas to flower more than the others ? - the classic example being that there is more research and findings for hair-colouring than alternative energy?
Science itself is neutral, or so we would like to think. It is the application of Science and its findings that become instrumentalized to fulfill a hidden agenda which most of the society is not aware of. Or so we would like to think.
But is science neutral? Can it be said that the creation of the atom bomb is innocent? It does not look ethical from any angle. But then this is an example most of us would agree with. But if we start measuring the ethics in the creation of every idea itself, what would we arrive at? What are the ethics in hysterectomy? Or abortion? What about pesticides? ...
I was trying to understand something which my mind was trying to point to. Madhulika, one of the participants in the meeting, finally put the words to it - there are power-relations, not only in the application of S&T, but in the very genesis of the idea, the funding for it, the process of allowing it come to the forefront and become a usable product.
Science & technology do not seem innocent. They seem to be political. In the way the very birth of the idea, it development, application and promotion.
To be explored further ....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)