Question 3
The Article Does Science Matter remarks upon the changing public opinion and newfound criticism of science and its practical purposes in a way that refers to both the good and bad wrought from research and discovery. It seems that the main point of the article is to weigh the pros and cons of scientific discovery in current times, when the question of morality has only recently been introduced. Aside from that, it seems we live in a time when certain fields of research have finally reached a point wherein the product of human ingenuity can be used to harm mankind, as opposed to benefit it. Even in biotechnology, a field which should be used specifically to help people, there is the fear of someone abusing the knowledge and technology capable in that line of research for destructive purposes. As said by Dr. Philip Kitcher, “As this becomes ever easier and cheaper, it’s only a matter of time before some misguided people decide to infect the world.” With an ever-increasing expanse of knowledge open to the public for manipulation, it only seems natural by now that some group of people will take advantage of these resources.
However, that is not to say that the article does not also speak of the great leaps science has taken in the actual betterment of mankind. As stated at one point in the article, “Advances in food, public health and medicine helped raise life expectancy in the United States in the past century from roughly 50 to 80 years.” The benefits mankind has received in terms of energy efficiency, human survival rates and the understanding of the universe as a whole argues the necessity of science. With all the opposition these fields have begun to receive, it comes to no surprise that many scientists fear for how their jobs and research will be perceived. With large portions of the population resisting the scientific method, and instead using religion as a guide, there is a clear divide in the population.
It seems to me that the excitement for scientific discovery among the population has stagnated, with fear and limits replacing what once was free and enthusiastic. As said in the article, “Without the space race and the cold war, and perhaps facing intrinsic limits as well as declining budgets, they are slightly adrift.” It seems to me that the United States as become so gripped with fear at how far science has come, and without a clear motive for necessary advancement, certain sciences have hit a point of fear to improve.
