E127849
Essay Preview: E127849
Report this essay
The scientists I know are full of reverence for life, for people, and for our future possibilities together. They are in awe of nature. They are humble in the presence of the simplest cell, bacteria, virus or bit of mold in a lab dish. There is a spirituality about pursuing science as deep and as sincere as any to be found in religion. There are indeed important moral and ethical questions to be debated about the “humanness” of the genetic research being carried out in labs, behind closed corporate doors, and in distant lands whose cultures and traditions make us edgy.
That said, I do not know a single genetic scientist, not one, who thinks that moral, ethical and even public reflection about the morality of genetic engineering is silly, pointless or unnecessary. In the halls I am lucky enough to travel in universities, companies and research institutes, these subjects are debated and discussed as hotly and as with as much passion as they are at the Vatican; in your church, synagogue or mosque; or at your dinner table. Scientists do care, and they care deeply what their peers think and what you and I think.
What we need is what C.P. Snow once called for: a bridge between the two cultures. For him, the bridge was between the sciences and the humanities. Today we need a bridge between those who do science and those who do values. Scientists do “do values” – it is just that few outsiders get to see them do so. And many of us are fascinated by genetic science but quickly give up trying to follow it because there are so very few to teach us. What we need today is a dialogue, a conversation, some old-fashioned jawing. We do not need demagoguery, fear-mongering or stereotyping. We certainly do not need bans and fiats and Do Not Pass Go restrictions.
What scientists need to do – and quickly – is come out of their laboratory lairs and be seen in public. You need to know about their aspirations, dreams, hopes,