Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
309 GT Nanotech Politics Links and State Solvency

309 GT Nanotech Politics Links and State Solvency

Ratings: (0)|Views: 43 |Likes:
Published by AffNeg.Com

More info:

Published by: AffNeg.Com on Jan 08, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/16/2009

 
Nanotech ptix links and states solvencyDDI 2008 <GT>Lewis
Index
Index ........................................................................................................... 1Nanotech is unpopular .................................................................................. 2Nanotech unpopular ..................................................................................... 3Nanotech is popular ..................................................................................... 5Nanotech is bipart ........................................................................................ 6Mccain supports bipart nanotech ................................................................... 7Mccain supports nanotech ............................................................................ 8Mccain supports nanotech ............................................................................ 9Obama supports nanotech .......................................................................... 10States solve-innovation .............................................................................. 11States solve nanotech regulation ................................................................ 12State solve general..................................................................................... 14State solve best-take initiative that the fed shirks ........................................ 15States solve best-decentralized ................................................................... 16Uniformity between states is normal means on nanotech .............................. 17Nanotech = extinction most morally repugnant and painful way .................... 18Continues… ................................................................................................ 19Continued no text deleted ........................................................................... 19
1
 
Nanotech ptix links and states solvencyDDI 2008 <GT>Lewis
Nanotech is unpopular 
Nanotech is overwhelmingly unpopular
By Rob
Beschizza
writer for wired.com February 18, 20
08
“Study: Only 1/3 Of Americans ThinkNanotechnology Is Morally Acceptable”http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/02/two-thirds-of-a.html
Nanotechnology
—materials, machines and other products fabricated with nanometer-sizedcomponents such as single atoms or molecules—
is morally unacceptable to mostAmericans
, according to a sampling taken by the University of Winconsin-Madison. Of 1,015adult Americans polled
, only 29.5 agreed that it was acceptable
, compared to more thanhalf in European countries. Dietram Scheufele, the university's proferssor of life sciencescommunication, claims its due to religious beliefs which inculcate people with a generalizedmistrust of science. In this view, even when scientific endeavor produces results with no clearreligious implications (unlike, say, evolution or human cloning) it's simply not on to go aroundthinking empirically about the natural world. Scheufele insists that
it's not a matter of misunderstanding what nanotechnology is — the respondents knew what they wererejecting. "They are rejecting it based on religious beliefs.
 
The issue isn't aboutinforming these people
," he told Science Daily. "
They are informed
." I think he's hyping anangle: religious belief merges neatly into irreligious fear of the new and other objections toscience. He specifically chooses to forget about the science-skeptical nature of postmodernists,feminists, environmentalists and countless other non-religious factions. Only about 60 percent of Brits are happy with nanotech, for example, and they're about as religious as cement.2
 
Nanotech ptix links and states solvencyDDI 2008 <GT>Lewis
Nanotech unpopular 
Nanotech is unpopular-religious beliefs
Dietram Scheufele University of Wisconsin-Madison survey center 15-Feb-2008 “Religion colorsAmericans' views of nanotechnology”MADISON --
Is nanotechnology morally acceptable? For a significant percentage of Americans, the answer is no, according to a recent survey of Americans' attitudesabout the science of the very small
. Addressing scientists here today (Feb. 15, 2008) at theannual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Dietram Scheufele,a University of Wisconsin-Madison professor of life sciences communication, presented newsurvey results that show religion
exerts far more influence on public views of technologyin the United States
than in Europe.
"Our data show a much low
er
percentage of peoplewho agree that nanotechnology is morally acceptable in the U.S.
than in Europe," saysScheufele, an
expert on public opinion and science and technology
. Nanotechnology is abranch of science and engineering devoted to the design and production of materials, structures,devices and circuits at the smallest achievable scale, typically in the realm of individual atomsand molecules. The ability to engineer matter at that scale has the potential to produce a vastarray of new technologies that could influence everything from computers to medicine. Already,dozens of products containing nanoscale materials or devices are on the market. In a sample of 1,015 adult Americans,
only 29.5 percent of respondents agreed that nanotechnologywas morally acceptable
. In European surveys that posed identical questions aboutnanotechnology to people in the United Kingdom and continental Europe, significantly higherpercentages of people accepted the moral validity of the technology. In the United Kingdom, 54.1percent found nanotechnology to be morally acceptable. In Germany, 62.7 percent had no moralqualms about nanotechnology, and in France 72.1 percent of survey respondents saw noproblems with the technology. "There seem to be distinct differences between the United Statesand countries that are key players in nanotech in Europe, in terms of attitudes towardnanotechnology," says Scheufele. Why the big difference? The answer, Scheufele believes, isreligion: "The United States is a country where religion plays an important role in peoples' lives. The importance of religion in these different countries that shows up in data set after data setparallels exactly the differences we're seeing in terms of moral views. European countries have amuch more secular perspective."
The catch for Americans with strong religiousconvictions
, Scheufele believes,
is that nanotechnology, biotechnology and stem cellresearch are lumped together as means to enhance human qualities. In short,researchers are viewed as "playing God" when they create materials that do not occurin nature
, especially where nanotechnology and biotechnology intertwine, says Scheufele. Heconducted the U.S. survey with Arizona State University (ASU) colleague Elizabeth Corley underthe auspices of the National Science Foundation-funded Center for Nanotechnology in Society atASU.
The moral qualms people of faith express about nanotechnology is not a questionof ignorance of the technology
, says Scheufele, explaining that survey
respondents arewell-informed about nanotechnology and its potential benefits. "They still oppose it
,"3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->