You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Risks of Unrestricted Science Publication and Endangered Species
Isn't that a problem generally in science? And its not only the question if the public should know about new discoveries, but the question if certain knowledge is harmful by nature.
Its a dilemma in which scientists can easily get trapped. As a scientist you seek knowledge, thats the purpose of science. But knowledge can be benefitial or dangerous, or even both at the same time. I think selected secrecy (telling A and B but not C) is not a real solution. It may delay a problem, but not prevent it.
In the case of new species for example, it might be best not to tell anybody if you found one. But then you are no scientist anymore. A catch 22 situation...
I agree. I also think it is the duty of scientists to share what they have discovered, otherwise what is the point? But you are right, certain knowledge is harmful by nature and withholding tidbits of information here or there doesn't really solve anything. We need to figure out ways to share learned information, while also protecting the source and object of study. It's definitely a dilemma.
Well, what we really need is, to learn to act responsible - even if that means not to pursue any further if we recognised the danger. You know, certain things... like genetic manipulation, or AI... may be we would be better off not having them. But they can be benefitial. too.
Also, often scientists have this attitude that they only do their job, and if their discoveries are misused later, its not their fault. Which is not totally unreasonable. Yet, it has brought us the nuclear weapons. Oh well...
Yes, I agree we need to double down on our responsibility but it's definitely a tricky subject. I don't think it means we need to stop our pursuit of knowledge. How can we make things safer or improve upon what we know without forward progress? We may not be able to perceive the dangers until we are in the thick of it. That's just how science and progress work. Virtually everything we study is going to have its share of dangers and setbacks, we just need to be prepared to meet them head on and ensure public safety and wellbeing. There are going to, unfortunately, be costs to reap the rewards (I know that sounds rather callous).
I do agree on your second point. How can you hold one man responsible for the actions of another? If you invented an ax as a tool to chop wood, is it your fault if your neighbor uses the ax to murder someone? In this instance, can you really blame the scientists for inadvertently providing the information to poachers? I feel for those scientists out there who have contributed work that was taken and corrupted by greedy individuals to their own ends. But now we have to ask: how do we prevent this from happening over and over again?
I'm really liking the comments I'm getting on this article! Thanks for commenting again!
You're welcome, I also enjoy a good conversation about such things. Elsewhere I dont have the chance to do that very often - and also, thats what we are here for, isn't it. :)
Yeah, how do we stop making the same mistakes again and again, thats a good question. I'm afraid, we won't. Like, we know how bad war is, and yet we do it again and again. May be we are hopeless.