You are on page 1of 36




a JztrVz;tttqQ
: a - l2t a /7"/'/2 /?177 /7./? C€

I "R\-:".r
420 Norlh Bridge Rood #0617, Norlh Eridge (enlre,
Singopore 188/2/,
hl:*65 6334 8//3.Iox:*65 6337 2434

suBlcRrPTroll RAlls FoR 2008

542 (12 issues,lonuorylo 0dober)
Forsubs(hii0n enqui es0nd bork issues, emoil:
brooderperspeoiv*@srhool ofthought.tom


Edilor in thief tliz0belh (on, li?@srhool-olthouqht.tom
Creolive Diredor Shi00 Yin (uik, yin@sthool.of'thoug ht.tom
S0ler & Subs(ripli0n! [,l0n0qer Yee Tonq, yee@srhool ofthought.tom
(0nrihuling Wriler xi00ding tinq,Jo5elin 80u, YeeT0ng,
l{0dio M0h, Amelli0 R0z0k, fti0ng Hong l(eol, /!l0ry Lee
lnlern Amellio Rozok
Prinler lobez Prinling Hou5e

S0le Dhtibulor Righleou! lnlern0lion0l 5ubs(ripli0n Servi(es

/1 llhi (rcrcnl#{5.09 sinsopore 408571
tel: 45 6323 l833. lox:.65 6323 1838

'l he nr cm s.ienrifi. .ofrnrnin more th.rn one \'4.of dealins rdth
thc hoal] old chcstnut of ltcligion.

Nietzsche declared "God is Dead".
Datukins urote that God was cr "Delusion"
So why aren't mot'e scientists turnblg atheist?



0 Omripotcnt.O riscicrt.
Is llankind rcalll as grcat

as hc thillk?

4 Airu dcnlonstr.rtion oihow aryuncnts

shoultl flor'.
Gcl io know some
flovocr live :1D.1
books r\'rilterl
aboui ihe science \'s. rcligioD debate.



()rrrM item s.rr.rc off on the issrre ofufi eiher
scierce needito he nore resnhle.l in the
lisht 0frercnt ad\ances. ''


lvhy d en t Singaporeans kicldng up as much Schrddirgcr's Cat? Chincsc Roirlns?
ofa nus ovtl Sticncc s L$ical conhovcnics? Pascal s \{''ager? Disc$er whatlies
behind ihese famo'ls relere|ces.

Five Ways
It is an age-old stereotype borne from the
Enlightenment: that those who hinge their entire
life's work on erploring the world ruing Reason cannot

ever make sense of Faitl. We present five prevailing

stock characteN representing varying beliefs within
the modem scientific community. By xiaochiDg Ling


0? 8R0A0FR PIRIPIOIVB l/)es.icnce& r.lioio,r tssu€



lloi rh 5 ho'd drlliry SBt

inie iAr $ 1lr R drrd

lt|t ( fl{Ttfrc PIr0sr0N
0 litK0Ml{

age-old stcrco!,!c of scienl ist as icoroclastic heretic, iniimidaicd bv t|e polenrics ol sLauncli atlieists, Dr li oq$!r explore5
ourrnost si den l athejsl scientists are nakiDg a Dane scientists ol lhe Abrahamic faitlis - J .taisx,.
(and atbrtune) turthenseh€stodayas Danrint rnost Christianit) and lslam ' li:rve thrcM thcir gauntlcts
yicious Rottweilers. No faith is sfared from the into the ftry as well. Thcir confidcncc (c tics sa),
bellige.ent bald or acidic liite ofscience s selfstyled a ogaDce) comes frcm thcir unwalerins belie I Lhal
Ol,l lrrr'.r,"ir r.,'l,.ts rlwl'^lp-ip\e r in'rhirg hr]rlr s i" ,..8 v". tn^\lpdse oI I'e a, r, rr isi ,n
rcnotclysul)cnahfa] are deenred as insane as those providcs rncanins. Esluian celebritt Beologist rrd W,lft IHIs
who b€lieve in fairies, flying teapots and other sorld dpelt oD biostraliiication Zagliloul El-Naggar
absurdisms. Richard DawkiDs. writer ofthc bcst rlsc-Oytli nagazine in 2oo7 as a kcy
was cited by
selling ?}e cod reft6mn, is by far onc ofthe rnost etanple ofrn Islanic tundancntalist scicntist lrho
rLl.lpr '!ni' Lq.'tl , C^ r'ir F^t,nl.dtion viewed the uDilerse entirclythroug| thelens (]1 (he
byscieDce aDd scicnce alon€, $ith Dan'in's'fheory' Ko.aD. El-Naggar belieles iD the scientific method
, It.nlu,. r Ja rd SiIti .Fo' t\4uouto ijrn-.i. but also uDapologctic.llv believes Lhat nrtural
To Dalvkins, at|eisnr islle o,rll logicaloutcone ard disastcN arc aD indicntion olCod s wnth oD Mdlkin.l
indication ofahealthr, jndependert mi!d. His critics Scientists like El Naggar horveve. sliould not bc
lrom both religious and scientific circlcs grcuse t|ai associated with the Aneican political morcrncntof
such o\€rt hostilig to thc $orld s fait|in unde.mioes CrentioDism ed its cousin, Intclligent D€sjgn, lvhich
ary effort to csiablish dialogue on science. In the .,rl lorlan.r ,.i.. il.J,d'i prdlin a,lral"r'on
dcbate o\cr crcationisnr fornrstance, atheisls are far ofscripiures that conclude t|at Cod crcated lhe wc,rld
morc dogmatict|an believe.s because unlilie :rtheisn, in sia days and drat Earth is 6,c)C)0 ]ears okl.
on.'s religioLrs idenlity does not hinge on one's stand Unsurtf isinglv, the Anr€ricnn creationist n.,venent
on evolu tion, lerviDg room for dirloguc. has beconre the {avourite target of tlie athcist
O'f IIIR SCItrNTISTS IN THIS C-q.TEGORY/ scientists, who nock itas pseudoscicncc.
,^neican ph,\sicist Richard Fcynnan; Finnish OI'IItrR SCIENTISTS IN THIS CA'I'I,]GORY/
inveDtor of thc LiDux kmncl. ]iDus l o.valds ( t EgptiaD cheDrist Wahccd Badarv_1, 4t

03 SRolltR PtRlPtOlVll t'h. \ti, p k r.liai.n

.) 4

ihtulioi beLlek vilh hn

l$ld or 8e{e ey

Unive6iry, Co ilornio.

GOD IS lN fHE DETAILS/ Unlike the siaunch \|/HO'S OUT TllERll?/ Not comtortable wiili the
defeDders offaiih, rhe bidge building believer makes someiimes belligerent corne. that athcists paint
overt attempts to reach out to their most\ agnostic thenselves into, many scientists cboose the nore
peers in the scientific cotlmunity. While they are
politically safe path of asDosticismr a cynic who
vd09(YTZXekA&{oohIe belieles ii is intelectuallv arrosant to proclain either
equally adamant lhat their identity is grouDded in there is absolutely no God orthat ihere was a
their{aith, they are keen to cxPoundto audicnces
specific Cod to believe in. The agDostic scieniists
ftom both tbe relisious as well as scieDtific fields the
A'rhur t. Ckrke, fomed usually advocaic staying open to the fact that there
physi{d Slepher Hoekinq
possibility of a Third way. They arsue that it is nay be a Highcr Poreer, a Creator or a More
(or nisleading to define the debate beiNeen Reason and lnteiligent Forcc beyond mere hunun beings bnr
md s(ienlirl Sogon
Faith as a dicholomy: one can use Reason to trncover ihey $'ill not posit who or what that is utltil they havc
rhe unilerse's secrets because laith is founded on norc prool Manyphysicists believe in a "sod'tlal
both Cod siveD Reason as well as Cod odanied is more of an abstractprinciple of order and harmony
Revelation. Science is Man's nost reliable way of ed a setofmatliematical equatiotis or physi@l la$'s
understanding the natural world but is Powerless to rather than a God sith pelsonhood and motivatiotls
answer queslions on neaning and Pu.pose ofthc The late paleontolosist Stephcn Jay Goltld arsued
ha) lrp ndlLral hold surk'. Bioln$ .an "^plrrr that science and faith could cocxist because they are
hor! human beings fall in love but not $'hy and what .nono!€rlapping" domahs ltith no comrnon ground
for. Dr. Fralris Conins is thc most prominent emple on which to clash, conflicting scientists like
of such a scieDtist lnown for his $ork on tle Hunan Collins who belicve science and faitli are
LFlornr P ojF.r. Fenr 'leborF wir\ tu"hdd Daqt in. intertwjned. The late cosmolosist Carl Sagan believed
iD TIME magazine and recently released book, that a ratioDal, Don'relisious vie$'ol reality was
lllio kr obo!r hov lhe me Lonsuage oJ God, detailing his coNemion fronr needed to solvc orr p.oblens bui Devertheless he
alheism ard subsequent crisis ol laith after the rape stil lioped lor an e\traterrestlial salior to savc us
of his daushter. fronl teclinologicat adolescence.
Hovklng be]leve in God ln
Potish cosmolosisi md Roman Catholic prie$ Michal Cosmologist Stephen HawkiDg, secular humanist and
Hcller, British pariicle theolosian and physicisi biologisl E.O. wilson (t

04 BloADlR DtRSlttTlVts tht "ip trliri.,t i..uP

Fact or Fiction?
Pcoplc actually worship a
Flying Spaghetti Monstcr!
I'R TI Ii. BTTI' \O I' IN TIItr I\i\Y 11)L THINI{.
,\l$ kno$n rs ih. Spag|cdcilv, th. F\'i.A SDush€lll
ll .,.' r-,--"r .l.".r- ''-,.i,r'
l' ol N. s!ch .rlli!ial religion eists of
corrse lt was tlLe purelr srtirical bunrchil.l of
llIl. UNIyURS]] IS,\ fIYSTDRY/ S.brtisrs Nlio urenploled engiDeer lobll lltndcND. i{ho crcrt.d
irllin this crtcgoN rrc rcgardcd .s wild.a s thnl it iD 2oo5 to makc nDck.r,a of nraiDst| thcistj.
Lrelong neithcrthc Scicncc"Dor"R.ligion crtup religions. Hisbonc ofcontcntioD rlas wit]r th. i(rns.s
Thet hale bceD perftired hcrcti.s b\ alheists, .l I,. , ldr.rr,, -,,lF.,i,, , ,J ,-
rgnostics xnd bcliclos .lilt. bcc.!se lher a.e so
s.hools to tca.h th. throi! ol j.telligert lesiEn {1.D.)
"r.'l r" \'.,.',, 1 u, .,,-i . , l.
bch.fs. Th.r uele. lo disasso(iate thernsel!es liom
r'1,,l. r,.. f .,'1,,.
b.iDghbell{alas reLigious" be(arseoltlie;.listrstc
llernlebon teLt LD. $.{s psrudoscicncc andproicstc(l
for "instilulionrlised religio! !arliculrr\' thr agairNt the notion ofrn jnt.lligcDt Crcator. Hc argncd
Abrrhr.ric Iajlhs. lhe! preler to crll theDlselvcs tliat f!ith-bascd rssu!rftions Ucrc .li.nlous rs lher
''sfirll!!l or ere. pa.adoiicrlh spi tual {theist' could Dot bc rcfutcd logicrllv: tlt Oe.1or (ould be
r,.1." aDlthjDg nnrginabl. {ere. somelLi,rs as.idicuLous rs
l.lasle r or New \e religioDs thrt rrc Dot focuscd on int.lligenl pislu) ns Lo.g as he chime.L to be its
llie concept ofr personrl (l(trIor thc to tblloN ''tJro!het"!ossessirigrsetof iuc'futablc holr'books.
cet1ain noml!recpts. Thc most frnrons cxanrtlc ol J leude$on elen \!ent as fr a-q to crcatc his o$r
mcli r scientist is,\mericNn fh!sicist ''gosjrel' depictiig a hcr\cn fillcd \it| rnd
1.,.\r..r fl /-. trt.!-\..,rr',9..r,i,t .. ,old htsc s \!.ll .s l,is ilr.rn,rir. r. rl,p |pr
aDd netaphlsics ilonld cv.ntLrau lc.d t., th. srlnr
CoDnnandmcnts thc Eight l.l t.lhd You l)id. ls.
knowle.Lgc. ,\noth.r rcc.Dt conhovcrsiil scienlisl ol'
this cat.gon isSan Hards$'|o]ris gain.{1a lbrlune
rrritiDg stfidcntlt atIcist boolis like /-.,rr(, lo d SiI..1h.n, dre lo e\fosure nr nLlnisteaDr as $'rll as
a-ltBtnn lrart., \!hi.hso re s( lei,l ists lkle cdticised ne{ rredia,lhe l:l Dg Spagliettj }'l{msto has bccemc
for bcing mere rehlrles ol o\!n persoral a part o{ popular c ltuc. bccoming thc falonrcd
''rc1iuior" t hal iirc.rrporrLes Drogrhen Bu.l.Lhist aDd srmbol bI athcists and lgnostics cv.rl1vhcr.1br l|.
AdraiLa Vedrrtic IIindu spiritualii! i'iihoxt '.. iI rl r'.l r',9,rl.l'. ,. |.1 .ii i,
incoriroratiDg the m\th and pcrstitioD t|at ofte. gcner!]. Oldcr inc
nrtioDs oJ lhe Spaghedeitt llrtl
accompaDics nrcditatioDal iD lhe reliAious s.n.d . si.)ilrr saljriral purpose iDcltr.le lertrand
I{L,ssell s 952 spinnirig celestial te!pot and thc 19e(
rHtR scm\t tsl s I\ 1 t IIS c |t Ir,GORl,l
() ID\isit,le Pink UtricoDi crcatcd bv thc lltcrD.t ic airll N.ile. Sam Ilanis 5,r DewsAroup alt.athcjsn. 6 i

05 Ell0ADIR PtRSPttTyt5 r/rr s.i.rr.r & rfliqi.)n irrr.

i,! 0ll Tlll lrR -ll

06 BR0ADtR PlR5PtflVtS rrr sl'i,Jt.r & rrli,/n,, iss!r

0nhi5M vr. Pf SS|[llsl,i





s0FNtt&Rt ct0tl


tselbre the Ei.stein Podolsky Rosen thought penalises the poserless to live out generarions of
expe.imcnt and Bell's Theorem blew ourrnhds about destitrtioD; Buddhist monks who live clandesthe
the prcs€nce ol a creativc po$'er beyond our three lives of rnaierialistic aDCt scxDal excess behnid a
dirnensional matrices oftime. space aDd maiter. Belbre saf.on fagadei Catholic priests wlio wantonl)
the reality of cloDing and inter-spccies genetic ignorc their vows ofcclibacy and chastity to grope IX(IRPT5 IROM R IHARD
enilineering caused us to dissect our collective I, i-to In , ,. rBA cl r.t dn r.'n;,l. .sh^.1 inr
conscience to qucstion lhe ever bluring line betweeD salvaLion b1 cod's smce but prcach hell and bdmstone
progress aDd regrcss. Beforc Religion got sophisticatcd on hornose\uals and liberals. The reality and honor
€Doughtonunageitspublicimageanddebu*point of reiisious hwocrisy is plain enough for anyone to
brDoint iD systematic - cven scientific - fashion all
thc \rays she had bccn so nisuDdersrood b) us
Torp-n.. B, .urp S.t pmL4r j .nF \. Jr t., nd1 : on bool{shelves liavc been assailed too by a recenr
cdsis and the shc$ mu ndane heartbreal thar co[es d (qreet virh hlm
onslaughtof bookswittenblscientists,be.ringthe
Loml.\r,.d-, lo,la, inr. l- \'nid Lu\-,r. n standnrdof atheism. of Dreaning, pu.posc and a philosophical Richa.d Dawkins, Tie"heGodrelusionbybiolc,gist
,n.1 o/Fdtrft by neu roscjeDtist iL]D TH !
Sani Harris and God: the Failed Hupothesis b.\
p\)^ .F v' o. Srrr'r' .\n rrd 1ei, F..:b, 1 ,lflJrol F"q
LET THII(tr BE ENLIGH IIjNMENT/ II rhe l5th call liom?lie lJei, ro?* besL selliDg list to rcsjst TND.
to 171h
each group
centlrln,,Icws, Catholics aDd Protesrants ,
crlling on the narne of cod tore a bloody
thc temptation to faith aDd fatuous tlinking. To t|ese F-E6*
stalwart atlieists, little rcason exists to call ofT its
swathe through Europe th.ough a conbinatjon of /oturd on all thinss reliitious. RelisioD to them is an
political coul1 irtrigues and ourr.ighr religious wars absurd, aDachronislic b€rst: at bcst, nrerely coniical @r'tr
against each other.It left bc|ird a contirent wcary i1ir. idr.Ll^r . .n.;.r-I. , u h.rnrart rt: \ utrtFr- T}]fINDOfRIASON
Rerd (llri'rion rheoloqlrn
ofGod and wary-of those i{ho chnnedto know Hin. religions texts; at rvo6t, completely gr.rtesque in the
It s'as a perfect set-up for the ofthc 18th century serics ofmonstrors nisdccds carried outniiis Datr,e
age of Enlishtenmcnt which proclanncd scientific by its rnost ignoble d.lorees.
reasoD as an altcrnatiye \raI ofunderstanding tlie
TH E ATI ILIST S CO\ I N DRUM/ ftp tuF,lior
that frrstmtcs atheist scjentjsts thc rnosl is this:why
Sadly, the 2rst cent!ry' offeN distubingh sinrilar is it tliat despite centuies i)fcducation, technological
disdanr rciision: Hindu fundamentalists and (he rise of alicmati!€ systems of thoug|r,
on the ighicousDess ofr castc systen that relision remajDs alile and $€ll loday?

0/ AR0iDR PERtPitilVtS i^. s.ii€n.c & relisl:on nsre


After all, logically spcakins l]s DasdinJ conscience and lnoraliiy tlithin humaD
hypothcsis goes ihe smarte. and more beinits is sceD as a plausible sisDpost ofa
, dvi n.ed maDLiDd becomcs. and the morc divire \a,ill driving the c|eation process.
nass Nedia awakens us to thehpoc.isies
ofreligir,us delotees, the natural outcorne THl], RI.]CENT PtrACE PROCtrSS/
$'ill be to enbracc scierce and/or atlieisni. I'lodcrn science has scttled into a knrd of
Cudously, the nurnbers of conle'ts to d€tentc i{ith its formcr eDeny becausc
ntheism in the ilo d has not dramatically rnoderaics on both sidcs have laid doi{D
risen with the changjng times. hstead. it is their arms and began a peace process
.eLigion nost p.omin.ntly the eler Although rhc Cathoiic Church has been
present Abrahanic.eLiitions of Judaisnr. rcundly criticised fo. its forbiddhs ol
ChristianiLy and Islam as well as thc al$'ays coniraceptive use aDd its adamaDt stand
ftshbnable Eastctr .eligions that lus againsisten ceLl rcsearch,someof itsmost
gro$r by eDviable lcaps and bounds powe Lll scientific cdtics who o e. both
togethcr xitli liodemisation. praclical sohtions and intcllectual
are fc,und withnl the Church itselt ln 1992

In 1916, rescarclie.James I€uba found only and 2ooo, t|e late PopeJohn Paul II issued
a fom l apolos, for all th€ histoical errors
4(l% of scientists believed in God. DevoutL)
athcist, he predictcd too that atheisrn $ould of thc Church inc.lndiDs the Calileo atrair.
spread as educationbccame more accessible Dawkins and IIa is. pleading lor a ljnionologist lldward O. Wilson's
'nore 'the Credtion: An Appeal ta Sate Lilb ot1
alld socicrr- more sofhisticated. tsul aftcr a conciliatorydebate. 1o \Voll atheist scieDcc
century of great change, in 1997, histodans is a lost cause politically and culturally &rrrr appcals to believeN ard Dotl-beiie'e'5
Larson and Witham replicate.i Leuba s because it carcs less rboutfixingtheworld s to unite lbrthe sake oltheplanet. Though
survey only to discover lhat thc depth ol' prcblenis and more .ibotrl being right rbout a sceptic ol religion, he argucs that b€liel
rcligious hith arnoDg scientisis had not thcir pafi icular doctrine of sciencc. iD God is a product ofevoluLion and thus,

budscd - 40% ofscieniists still agreed that should not be re.jccted o. dismissed,
God aDd an afterlife exists- Moreov€r, the Clearlt many modem scientists see bul further inresLigatcd by sciencc to
research fouDd that mathematicians w€re better understaDd lhcir significnnce to
no contradiction between a quest
nost inclined to believe in God while to understand nature and
biologists, physicisrs and astronomers
tended to have the lighest rate of disbeliet
supernature. TheY accePt the Therehas been a well-pu bliciscd toc)
This findins .eveals that orthodo\ relisiotl
possibility of a deity that exists jn thc nunber of "cvaDgelist scicntists'
is no rnore disappcaring among tlie outside of our testable reality of like Dr. Francis ColliDs ard Dr. Zashloul
iDtellectual elite thar it is amoDgthepublic space, trme and matter - essentially Ll Naggar who have won the rcspecl of both
their scientific and .elisious cortenporaries
beyond science's ability to fully
because of thejr intelleciual ardscridural
assess. To them, truth can come to
One ar.esting rcasoD for why atheisn his thei beliefs
iDtegrity. Reconciliation of
light thrcugh both scientific enquiry comes from their position on the
not caught the nnagination ofnrorc People
scientjsts or otleNrisc - $'as oneredby a
and divine revelation. Thc Diaiest), interpretation of r€ligious torts: not every
elcgance and jntdcacyofthe outersPace of passase should be taken literally especialy
2oo7 I4rIRltI) niagazinc articLe bt.' GaN
rhc universe and nrner space of hrunrn \rhen ihe saiptures arc in the fonn of poeby
Woll. Evcn to aD ngnostic like Wolf, it is
benrgs is testimony eDough that everything or songs rather than instructioD or history '
difficult for atheists lo sell their ideas as
has bccn inteLLigentlt' created by some In or her words. what were memt to be read
lols as Lhe.y sound so openly con.tescendins
Suprene force rather t|an thro$'n iogethcr
of the 90% of thc rvorkl Lhat bclieves jn as meiaphols aDd synbols should not be
wolf by pure chance. lor instaDce. il the read as absolute fact. lhev are quick b point
religioD in some form or other.
gravitational constant were off br-' oDe part out discrepancies iD tlie belicfs of
concludcs that "exlremisn in oppositionto
in i hnndre.lmillion million. thc univeme lLrndamentalists on both sides. l]ven hard-
exlremism is too uch'. Sadly, sornc of
could not hrre evanded after the Big B{ng nosed atheist Richard Dawkins lras
science\ mostprominentatheists arejust
in a i{ay th{t would allow life to octur. E!€n grudgingly admilted to respecliI)S thc
as oppressilc, self-righleous ard rcpulsively
the prescDce ofa sophisiicated concept of sciertilic kno$'ledge (if not the religious
dogrnatic as rel igion's $'orst
lundanentalists. Even scientists $'ho hclinarjc,ns) of esteemed British prrticle
nttellectu \ side wiih the lie\rs of ath.isn! j ,ri,-", physicist xnd ChrisiiaD fieologian Rocrend
uncomfortable with i|c toDe ofnoral and | ,ltn?r3llr (rtn,r/ /' drr,,ltti Dr. JohD PolkinshoDe.
intellectual righieousDcss, are quick to I d,fi.rt,lld!,/!srn'hirr.r./rn!,r'1,r.
divorce thcmselves |rom the likes of

08 BCOrDlq
Dt\0trTtF t] .. i, .t. .\ t 1t.1. .t, i . t.
xl!ch lilie laliled !rodigalsoD. Scicncr
Ll)e frsscddoiu tr$titi..s.nd natn. lor.. l)1s.. l.l.i, srid. "lll.,..!,,r tl,al (tl)e
hrs been irreiistil)lr drr$.n ha!]i n) its old Th. tuit]rs th.t br!. .n.ld|cd .lkl so t)i,JlLl b,)n'b) $as d,opped \as j!st tl,rt ,roLod!
homr rnd hcarth. Fcw of t.dar's Iouths b..rLisi, llieir loLkN\€a irrlLidriousL\ mrde hnl the rou[Se or lhe foresight to sr! no.
rajscd on dclibcratcly in.ligious nrodeD sui e llielr s(ri! surrired the iourne\ 11r blanrct techrical aDogxncc and th.
edLrcation slsterns i.e arva.e ol tle histot oJ tine, iDtelledurl !fhc{\'al rnd soc!) illusnD ofsod likc lmiv.r tbr olcBvb.lnr i.s
ol sc;erce lhat clearl) sho$, ho$. Reliiiiorl political chaDgc: th. Buddhist Trifitrk^. ti..o.rnro.s. ns. .l lh. srieflilir
fathered Science. Thc,\brrhrnic lriths tlrc H|rdn Vcdrs, tlr. J.wish l i.rltll. lh. (omm!ritv. Free of the ethical
Jtrdaism, Chrislirnitt and Ishlr rll Ciristirn Bibl. rnd rhe Ish i{ Kortir framework laid dorvn by our
r.llocat. thr sccknrg oflno$lcdgc rnd tb. |..f1. l,)\e,l their relisi.)rs !asiionrtelv rcligious beliel.s, science $,ill instead
.x.min.tion ol rilrtr. fir.lL,.s o1 . di\ i.e eroustr to pksen e thern rl all costs. Tod.Ll,
Cr.rlor. lh.\ b.Li€\e lhrl Cod (nf lre be dfiven byour habits, our politics,
Lhe io ner Soviet strtes ste {florL Shnrgof
horourel lh.ough the respectful and rclignm !nd !n a])rDdoDnrcnt olrt|.isnl our selfish inclinations, our
rjgourous ust of thc mird or tof of tIc r stit. of!.rN ol bknd\ elb,1 Lo,e0r.rss ecoDomic systems and our
hcrri.Dd stirit. Ifunr ClrristiNns ind colnpetitive d ve to know. What
Crtholics llid do\!n k.Itl..ri.s.l nr.dc l will be the eqnivalcnt oflliroshima
thvsi{'s,..|.nristr',, rni Lrerralic! l)eslite lhe cullLrrrli{rN Lreingfought otr 1br the 2tst centuly now that our
rrl ge.elics: Gies,)r Aje,r!lel. Rene theierchilg of.rcrtidrism rDd iDtclluturl
technologies have become lar more
Deicades, Ilirluel l:aradur. Bhisc 1'ascrl. dcsigDin.\!rc .an nhools. Drsr lnard. in
Robtrt Bovl., Louis hsi.!r.II!\ lhDrk. dr cnd \..1 lo.c( !r)\ 1le frlddle qn,rd, frightcning, [oreign and groul,Icl
Ihvrs rlsoth... lNInsli.r $h. desirlng Liollr {ien(e rnl religlD m their breakiDlt? lhe possible (Le(nnltnD ofour
grrLr tlr. hr,rld rh..onrtJi ol /ero. lhe ll\es. Iew $rtrt to bc tiihrr Lxdditc or b sphcrc l!
nxnotcdrnologl ru! rmol?
srslenr olrlg.b,r, lIe rtodeu i,ui,rberiuil atheist for r good rcailr. E cnnodllo!.s Th. cr.rti(D ofr lnrdcm crstc srst.m $itb
\stelr arnl hid llle guNnl\rork for nodcrn thc conlcDi.ncc of t..I.olog!. Bn1 rs t..t.rirg or t.f an.l r nriss ol ll rsl,nlel,
Dlediclie as $.ell {s rhoristf . J st a l.xrli sirnult.n.onslL in!oD. \'ho hiLs xrertlrd n+.llio,Ls i,1iici.L l.l.illise.L belrAs at LLe
at mrthcDiaticxl and s.i.rntifr. lcxi.o. \ ilh r ., rsliirg corirful€r or o urkv toasler lr!tlorn:' llre djl!tion ol !rr Setretic pooi llris l..l: rlg. 1h.r, rlgebri. !Ll,tli. oren lnLows this simtle truth: tlic liagilit! be!!usc of x ncontriD cd grnctic\ rlL b..rr llie p.ell\ ol rl slort a!d iDefficicDct of hum!n nradc cnginrcring? Thc.rcrtion of bh.k h.l.s
1o.,r lor tlie Aulric 1!orl ,\lhh lcod). tcdnDlogics and slstons do Dot i.s|ir. t]ulks to.n atom rsld gon. r\ il'?
lbsolut. contidcn.c. \\ir oblioL,sl\ ]1r\.
S llrrising]l. rtircirD s trvoxlit. oid
cvcD lrorLbl. r!1,i.g relrll!el\ slrrule l HI,l ltOAl) Ll.lSS l ROl)l)lili/ XI{nI
intcll(lurl malrlTs Cj.lil.o Crlil.i rn.l l.cltr!toSi(,s Norli, rDd clen nrore tr)ublc deo llo$ Religion futs Science on ashol1
(lhr es lh vi. re\ e, \ei,t rLS lir$ Lo douln $ith DraDrging $'hcrc our hnmrD lcrsh. hniting scicntifi. crtloratioD .nd
the erisleDCe oi cod. calileo reDrrnrcd r imfuls.s Nrnt to t.kc us. ADd tl. nror. tl!s hum.n frogrcss. B!t thti q,,esljors
devout Crlholic dt-.titt bting unfxirlv scicn..r fus]r.s .rr 1hl tt.ligion N,e nece\srrr rrd c!1
hbellcd bl thc crtholic Inquisrti r rs r l.,Lrrdrri.s, lh. .rore lrjali lcl ir{l\ Lo llre lrearl: llt)to trrrlt ntQt hunrDl
|cr.tic fd tushingIr hll)ot|.sis r]rri r|. dlr.,gdrl 0alhs, lile tltering lecisioN ard Ltul)lrtllta orl n1ar. i( lrlg.fss do u.
slLn \!.s rhc.cnrr. oi lh. solar s!!Leirr rfd altetruU\ e fLrtures il opeDs up tor ns. lciDg rt\l|u tlttd ta.hx t11.! lttr'\d? O l,ris th.
r'ol llanh as ltre Catl,oli( Cli!r(h lrelie!ed. essenti!lll rnoral. Scicncc crnnot rDdnill onstr.r lt. iD n1Ltl1 nn,a'fun.loDtn1nl
DrNin hnristlfilas coDriDccd tliat (l(trll$ nott.llnshowtoch.os.orivhrl 1..hoose. rrrr!rrstD D/ /,r,i,.r,r /rc(ttt at u)ill? Li,
thr Firn Cmsc of thc uDnarsc His ll !i!ri Onl] Rrligio. Innid.s us,!ad rrrr)s Lo (hat da rrr fi,rir. oll 1/r.s.
from Ch]istirDil, to!!rds rgnosti.isnr i!.s tole.LiaLLr Iixustirr brrg!ir)s n\:lIr)laqit\ ruotsl V11! do r\i tl. the
n.t |Nrus. of Iis dis.or.ries .borL I hro!sl, (leliuetLiDg clear perirnetc'rs of dglit lhirqs /idi u,do.')Tne. $.. n sthonour
!\'.Irtion brLl b..,ius. hF (o!l!1 irol coi!e t! ou go.L-girtD irltrcDt hrunrD curiosit!.
le rs $ilh the deall olhis daughter]\lnie. 1rhL. frc.dom ol inf.r.rrtion r.i
]t ${s ! crisi-\ of frith iD thr bcncvolcncc of IIIR()SHIIIA S LTCACY/ lh., .rse th. criffli.g elle( t ol !!lli|g
God utlrcr thrn thc.\istc..c ol Cod. sl,,,1r o1 lio$ \re.,aIrEel !urlear too,r rl restrictioDi oD the pursuit of
Le(ltn,)logr' \Li!ul.l gi!e us enough reason hrowledge. lut rs ThoretN onc slnL:nc
s()ltlt'r'NlElzscHt., (;( )l' ts (NO t) r! $h) \'e reed rtliijbn in r scicDtificalh
to will be 'rirh in frofortnr t{) thc nrmln'
l)l,rAl)/ So {h\ else does G!d renrin aclr{nctd n)ci.t1. Phlsicists \Lho wo*.d ol thilgs rrc cln rflor(i to lct .lonc.'
delirrnlr rlne ur iD aije ofscience:r lt hrDs ontlcfirst xtomicbomb nr thc \lrnhrlta. \Vc Drust dis.cnr rrt k..\lodge ir loo
out thc otrlt gods thrt lrr{l .licd el.Dg tlrc Proj..trr.r.d..fl\'nro ill.d br lhr le(jlJle d.rdsercus 1o r!A!e und rhi(h rords are
wi] to nrxldrlisrtion ivo. Z.ns. Rr. (ldin hu ar' cod !.rid llirlsliiruald Nagasrlii besl left urtrodden. \\'e need noi risk
r.d SIn \\rL Korg: l)iL.LIeorrs o1 g!ds lor tLeir $orli. Norse. their ir!.nti(r l.d elrtthing that is noblcn xn.l bcst nr tlris
s1..r irs liof' liLlrell{1.)!b b!sed !oi or to lhe (reation oftht nuchar aNrs rdcc rnd worldfor thc sakc olfrrfit orJrst oD. mor.
lhe riso! r s(trL! rrl do(unetrtation rnd
o1 rD orarpoi{.furg $sc ol fo]itnll tr.rnoir ilto laDdora s box. T|. Ih.h.rL1.r.
exrnLituti!n l t on the lugaics ol orllh tl t t.rsists to t|is dr!.I'blsi.isi F,..mrn Pro;ecl s ph\sicisls will teslih to that.l,

09 BR0,\DtRPtllPlOVt5 /!1tr(t rriir/r,r issrc

rJt\t tN!l lllxll"l6lil


A80UI Illt rr TtR

0 8PO{D[P
DrR P.L r- / '
WAITli Tt] 5

ffit ftrtY:
tv0wt? K[ wt DtD.

tdky'\1e /id/te

txe(urive tditorolWlRtD
mogorne K€vir Ke ly !\ei

vrloe of le(hnolo9y. 8y

(onpiexilyh nu{h iko lhe

"Man is omnipotent." Uslnsodhdplinehoppins

MOSTLY I'RUtr. BL]IT NOT IN THE \vAY THAT e,ort\ of the Tower of Babel trusiins carelessly that exofi(lloro ro $e 8ig Bons,
$rtr WANT/ Itk njndbosslins when you r€allr think $'e have techDolosical soluiions to deal with any
about it. We opentcon brains on a dailybasis, grow ervironnental fallout? Whjle not doubtingthe scale
lifc at will in pehi dishes, pilot nachines that can and success of Man s material prosress and the
reach great heights and depths, peek at uDiverses elevation ofgenerations out of tlie stan'ing clasles,
n,ill:ons.r. oillr"ns o lrl"J"1n awa\. r.! such incredible amounts of power exercised on a daily
agriculture inelds, and rcad the genetic code that makes basis by scientists, engineers, military men and
up the esseDcc ofhurnan life. Man has been able to politicians should worry us a lot more.
wield so much poh€r and control ove. his envircDnent
and ensure his continuance and domiDance so Man's omnipotence is dubious and troublins because
successluly in a hostilel\'orld that it is little wonder such power is wielded less rs a benisn ad ben€volent
he thinks he is omnipote . Is it very surprising that force but more like an amoral 5 year old drowning a
{F" ".!e.p\\plrp\el}al i i,onh amdll"r ot .im- whole colony of ants in the gaden. lhis mixhre of
J|d nni' \ hniorp ue .oloni,F \pd.e :n\Fr. rirnp arrogancc, curiosi\,, emotional detachment and
tralel, resurrectthe near dead from freezers aDd sei .on pell',rg nppd.o \Fa,hjg, ro rh. :'tusjiil, orrir5ro I
to live oul olll lives as ghosts ni the niachnre? Scie!rc, can put manldnd at tremendous dsk every tiDe a ne$'
Man crows, is rhe sirgle nost powcrtul tool at his technologl, enelges. our collective need io know can
rrr.geirom,\e.r'sJr|,s rhe po.sibiitiF.
animals as drus facto es to the norbid fascin.ttiorl
Thc problen is when IIan brandish€s power like bols with breeding chjmeras. Any arising corcems are
showing offtheir nelr tot6. $rhat does ii also say about bru.led asid" in rhe nimF olpru;Fss J10 pcnnnnr...
our species that now more than ever, we are able to or by the complacetrce that Man has ihings under
liil] our fellow mer nio.e efficiently or - depending control. This is especially so today since scjentificand
on your politics - more painfully on a wider scale, techtlolosical applications arc continually held hostage
dcl, rn ne t-,e rtFl-'gpn, e dn,l hedlth
" uJr brbie. by corporaie entities more interested in the monetary
and perhaps their athletic abilities in tuture, not drink and military gains to be made than any vasue or
twjce about duplicartug or modifying thc things possible ethical quanda['.
we eat on a dailybasis andbuild larsc scale projects

ll Bc0lDtR PfRSPt0lVtS,1,?' i,r ? tr r rlts - r' ;,:ue


ofco,,xethe ans$eis not onethatthe ludditeswo d

havc us embracei ihc cffects ol scieDce ard techDology
sprang out ofPandora's box a long tirne ago and jt is
really not very constructi\c trlking about iro$'$€ can
IUAN Il{RIOUTZ: turn back time. Whal we musi re]l1emb€l foremost is
DICOD] GTllIfUTURI that the powcr $'e liave to renuke the world and
WTH GI]!OMITS humaDkind also changes lhe rclationships ihai we
have $'ith them, nrost times irretrievably. WiI we stjl
be recosnisablyhunan decadeslron now or will the
assertion ofsuch rawDoNcr mean the eitinction of

Every cutting-edge technology tirat p.omisds t.)
relolutioDise the world hs dlso spa$ned r whole host
IqypiioD s{iely, rhe
of ethical dilennts andharmlul side cffects whose
.ur:nB l'd\, 'rDUr' I ol ,d r4d u\ Tli\ i.
bccause our asccndanc) in this world has blinkered
us:rve rarelv havc enouqh humilitr or foresigbt io see
brouqhr wirh ir rhe ero o{
the fragility or potcDtial problems ofthe thjngs we
bujld. For e!e.y scicDtist thai s'oried about thc
consequences of the Manhattan Projcct, tliere are
dozens more who rvould kill to be included in tliat

We may have to concede that power is sometimes best

- brinq us?
contained or controlled. ihat sometimes we have to
draw a line in the sand and say "no" or say "wait"
xlan's power nust bc f!11)'
recognised and tenpered by
wisdom and restraint to count . :3.3'
as a meaningful force for good.
As citizens with voting ghts,
I '.r--.
we ought to dernand nore
public discussion and refer-
'endun on issucs to do with ncw
"Man is
tcchnologies. As lotrg as morc
infonnation is disseninated into
the public spherc, se can omniscient."
becomc more cognizaDt of ho\t
scienlific ard technolosical
prowess is us.d on our behalf. U RI)l,l'/ Upon firstglance, it mayseem an unfajr
Because legislation st ill thingto say. Ho$'can hundrcds ofyea.s ofscienlific
continues to lag behind scientific advancement, we discovery and man s atiendant increase in knowiedge
be co pletely discounted? From 1 A.D , took one
must insist onluvirg Buidins aDd ethical princiPles
spelt out as breakthroughs in cutting-edge technolog,v and a half thousand years for information to double
tlp IJrro-".hnn,^B\. 'oooli . I, r,c.: Fn8 nq riIJ and reach the high point ofthe Renaissance. Now,
and seDonics to namc a ferv, can comc suddenly upon experts asree that the snm of all accumulated
us. We should not irait too long nor be too blas6 knowledse is doubLins evcry ferv yearc or so with
because. likc Icarus. we can easill plunge into a infonnation production SetiiDg fasterand faster, we
hubristic momss of our own makiDs. I t can rcliably sav ihat tnan $'ill knoiv ev€n more as the

t2 SR(]ADIRP'R!P-(,Vl( ./r,., r., p.! /.l,ylrr. +\!


Relativib', quantum mechanics, computational theory, and smug scientific posiiioD today that truth and
cosnitive neuroscience, sFthetic biology, the list - knolvledge has no space for rclisious or nystical
and ii is admittedly an imprcssive list goes on. More sobbledyeooL Nobel laurcates nor! sav that "the woild
than ever, nrn has breached the barriers ofisnorance needs to wake up frcm its long nightmare of relisious
and mtstery dd reached a state where most scientists belief and renoMed scientists assert ihat religious
ad resedch€.s agree that they now know mo.e about educatioDis buinrrashing ' and tantamount to child
HODtlPS0 rR080TS
the nateial world than any geneEtion before them.
Not orly that, at this rate of discovelT, it is practicaly
a siven thai any gaps in kno$'ledge will defiDitely bc While not thrownu evohtion and the Big Bdg theor] lkshiev/id/165
[Ied h sooner rathcrtban ]at€r. and tne laws ofphysics over for an insistencc that
scierce classcs onl)' teach intelligent desisn (proposed Robokii tiplon demmnmres
But does this qDali!'as being all-knowing? OfcouNe, b) equallr closed and dognatic relisious individuais), ! le\{ ol his ool ift,obors,
whi{h hove rhs obtliry
lh..^i'nor \pn\Fidm...iul . thJr Io(a lnr'.rFr, na]'bc we need to admit that nan Gnnot be lruly all, ro
leorr, unde6hnrl,hemielvg
of the universe have been pcnetrated, and that there knowing if rre shtrt down different routes townrds
ofd even re l.rep kote.Arlhe
are still plenty of quesiions that have yet to be linding answers aDd neaning. Opiimisticatiy there roo of thr umonny demo s

anssered about thc hurnan body or the mtuml $'orld. are cerlajD organisations and scientists who take less o deep inqLriryinrorhe mi!ru
Other than that, ifweiust look rt our cun€nt state of polaisins positions in the search for truth. The ol hov huoioDi ond livins
kDo$'ledgc, the problen is two-fold. Notonlt-are we p.estigious Templeton Prize awards granrs to
lrow ve nlghr homss thse
droMing in all the infornation $'e lave, ne also do cncourage discc,verv oD the bis questions in science
pmielses,o m!ks $ nssrhot
not view it or use it asjrdiciously as we shorld. Man ard thiio.opn\. surlp..i.nrisli\t"r4 h4:f li p In rg
may hare tremendous amounts of data and to reconcile the kDowable dinensions of scieDce with
infornatjon at his finilertips blt does it arnount to the unknowables of religioD and cod, and others
r- I \r n\.1, d8" ld nrF?nir;: \4Jn s n\F-al ning search for why beljefin God exists.
desirc to soh€yet another scieDtific conundrun has
yct to mean that the arswers will autonaticilly help
Finding the God pafticle or proving
u5 u, rFr\lJnJ u.Ii-l\.. Lcrrpr o'rIJr $ wil gJrl
the necessary insight to be better human bcings. the authenticity of the Shroud of
Turin does not make man
whiie tbe search for truth is connne.dable and
Dcccssary, the probleni also is i'hcn r€equate nlan's
omniscient. Maybe the answer
onrniscience only with scicDtific n.uth. ScieDce $'as does not have to do with having to
originally used as atool to €xplore the natural {orld
know the answers to every,thing.
bul nu$ i ..'dl,'.nls\ava I l Fn un ! qldr- .ligiou.
position - "scientisn that purports to ans\€r ALL Human beings need meaning tn
qucstions about the univeNe and burnan existence. life; there isn't always a need to
Man's supposed onDiscieDcc is h.oublirg because not
only is lhe vahre ofscieDtific knowledge c.rnipletely
take that away from them just to
u nquestioDed but jt is also accoinpaniedbya dosma prove thal whai they believe is
lhat discouDts othq liDes ol jnqujry complctely. flawed or cannot possibly exist.
Science's insistence on having the monopoly on truth
is creating a
witch hunt where an]'ihing that does not A higher and deeper kno$'ledse of tnth cones fron
conform to the ru]es of science is sneered at and being oper to wonder and possibjlitl . The story of the
hounded oni of exisien.P
universe, $hether you are coning from an
evohtiona{' or religious point of view, can be equally
'llis in the fractious battle fo.
caD be sccn esDecially glo olts and awe inspning-ft
truth bct$'cen science and religjon. Instead of the
oFnn€ss ol lhought that earl)' scieniists had and their
accommodatins rclationshit lith rcligioD, ironjcally
it h now moden science that is more hostilc to
p.rssibilities. Thc.c seens 10 be niore ofa complacent

l' BR0A0[R PtR(PrrV6 rh. 5rirn ra /.t,oro",s\1.


The Macro Makeover

A flrll demonstration of horv iuguments should flow lvhile
considedng content over\riews. By Tong Ycc

ne frustration rve have had in the Essay

Makeover sectiot.t is to find the editorial space
to do a complete makeover of an entire essay.
F.edbrrk llom stL enls th.t i{e haYe don. a mrkeoverfor so 1ar lias
bccn posiUre bnt n'e rlso coDsisieDtlv re.eivc iuelitrble q cstiiDs on
ho!v to correcl thc other lrragrtPhs that l'e.€.ot addressed iD our
features. \{lile Dol lbr a hck to do lhis ihcmsehes, sttrdcnts did le'lthat it
was impoftart to see rn cDti.e ess.) btiDs Irrdc ovtr so lh.i corLld sludy rll
Aitunv rriith n4ts.ll
rHorocRtrDn/ thc sltills j. lhcir cnti.elr. \'c hale Lhe fc cct e\cuse to do this irr lhis iss e
LP.rrl littn.h.nk.t.
alic&ro!drtL. Clemcnt carnestlt agrc.d to be our cssrY ttillng Suirer pig.nd sit lor a 9.) ninute
alortt.ns sessioD $'heE he rrs giten t sliencc and te(hnolog] qtrestjon io attenlrl i a toPic that
hadJUsi rcc.ntl! bee. co\cred in his scnool. We trsk.d Clcnent 1o .pplv rll essal rv'iting
rlE1]UTTIt IlIITIl( skills rs hc undc$tood th.Dr. Upon lhe conpletioI olhis csst\ - N. fiDislie.L 1L€ sessioD
'lt rg |c. by asking aboni his expel ien.c and gol hirD n) exPhin his kcv slNgSlcs nliile {riling
th. i ndiat na t io I h
u/r., negor liisli/sr /l
li,r d srd! l. urok cleDeDt lilt ihat lLe hrd doDe adequrtcl] ell a ll.r thc e{reriencc, |irnarilr lion the
Ilc /r.s stru lrr,?il l/ror
fact tllal hc had 7 conL!lete paragraphs oD a toPic he did Dot hare much
srp?L4!.!s r!rt,is/r
coDfidence in. As hc was taught, therc {as c\id.nce ol a rgtrmcDt starl ing $ith Pa.xg'alhs
d.tsnoL 1ak..far qaotl
rssdrs o,d rndl /rc ihat supported |is strnd ard laicrthe co.sidcratioD rnd dcbatirg oi balancfig ideas
sh.uldlisl., t. i/i. lle rccogdzed holvclcrtlxrt he wrs lost iI |is osrr argumenl midj{rvlhurg| thepaPer'
fc.dbdLk af hi5 l1e ilso lb nd il r)ert lo inpossilrl. to gtnerale .Dough extnrll.s thlt \!ould vali.late
{ddi.n... n,l /iis!ride. crch point |c i{rs Lrr' i.gto uise. Ne will be add ressing tliese iss cs !s \!ell as nchnrg
?i ! k.6drtx/n.ltrir to supplenr.nt ClonerI s fonrts with lhc tight errmln.s lic reeds.
t.rtu an.llc0./r.rdr
s1:t1oot t)f Thaunht.

l4 ER0ADtR PtRSPttTlVtS i/L s.l,,.r & rfli(/n,i rsrr.

XIor. importaDth, $'e Jell that Clement did not posscss a mrc.o oye^ ie$,ofthe topic. $rc
ftrd that dris qualit) Orak€s a huiie.titrcrcncc in anvsnrdeoL s suipt, remltilg jD stroDgcr
flows iD ard nuch nnrrc convincilg staids thaL .e rlt iI stroDg conchrsions.
lvitho!L tlis rlacro \iei! of thc issuc at hand. iL js entirel) possible to slythnrgs that sound
naive and sinplisiic. Noi suruisinitl!. alter being enlightcncd I'idr .n understanding of
todar"s global sccni o in sciertillc developnent. Cl.nrcnt read his essa! again \!ith Do!
elcs and agreed lhal he Nould liare changcd his stand a.d poirts had he knoi{n this

We sLa.t therefore nitlr this nronr]r s question rDd a m{cro olcnic$'ofwhat'!e should
lirst understand about scicnce a.d t€chnolo&r tdar. Follo\ing th.t, read ourcomlients
on each s pamgftphs and sec'r.hcthcr you fiDd his pamg.aphs convincins. wc
thcn finish oll Lhis week s niakeovcr ryith paragraphs reu'.itten and rggested poirxs that
\otrld |are nade llis essavbctto.

>/azt inzenlic>ns anJ Ascaveies ate uSeJ ;s
n..l lhe concurn o{ l/te 5c;ehl;sl.
Do yozz a3ru"7
This cssa! .annot be wriL t€! {ithout rD axrrcDcss of thc co Dl ruveN} tlht rcunds rcccnt
dclclotrnents in science aDd technobs, today.nd l}e i.rplications it hrs oD a scicntist s
rcsfonsibility Lo liis connnuDitv, aDd .vdr hu al]il). CleineDt coukl not lossjbly Iale
clain€cl thrt he kn.i{ not|ing aboul nuclear techDology, biot.chnology or artiliciaL
nltelligeDcc, cvcD if|e.oL,ld claj.L thrt he has nclcr hcrrd ofnrDotechnolos\, the PuJrilash
Confcrcnccs or conrf anies lilie NonsaDto.

Th. foinl is thaL o!. delelopments in scicn.c today open u! possibilities ofunfrcccdcntcd
techdological rpplicrti{ms tlut co ld ver_\ well colLpronise hunuD s.ctri1l and saDctity.
'1he idea that scientists n.c.l nol tal,e rcsponsibilitv nav have bccn a notion espoused Nhen
i{e $'erc still dc.ling wjlli penicides, dmaDritc or antibiotics (a.d even then it $'as
controlcrsill). Bul these drvs, with t.chnologicrl iD.olaLjo lropelled by fice markct
dcmrn.l, scienlillc progress coDuctitilcly nrarking lhe !.oBress ofa nrtion, jDtcmatioDal
inslitL,ljons too werkto bdDgglobal consensus o. deyelopmerts and ftrDding for contmveNial
rcsearch nore easih xttanrcd, tlt Dren standirg h the n dlc ol all this nrdeed ha\€ a
Dioral responsibiliB to be al leasL coDcened ifDot liablc.Th. onlyh'at we can a.gue that
scieDtists shonkl no( be concene.l is to rcccpt thc factt|at apath! mar be the oDlv wav a
scicntisl can (o!e wjth thc vast changcs nis work is brinsirs to thc human racc.

15 BROA0IR Pt[sPt(Ivt5 l/t sr(,r'. & r.liqor issl.]


I5T PARAGRAP|| rhc most imlortant

ihing to do in irtroductions is to dive
straight into the key issle behind the cLtrMUNI"S ESSAY/
question. ln this case rhe }ey issue is in
the contD!€Ar $1r I screnhsh har e to t&e f
resfon< hilrty ur bc (once,ned $,th I J/oL|;2t,1;-., 1lr/ hds ltu4ht al-'.r ;fttuas"d .lrt1e'*." .t/
deve oDnrents that h. rr proneenna Lhe I t t;/;l..1eJ ac.ess l- ea3;et .r|,t aate"tTc'"ht le.hh-/.5/ ,icr-33 th"
errminer istrdlj as&cofth*eN 5dd
c\Dects \ou to lat out the iscDe in boti
S/.J",;/ ;3 /;t//e tuahler thal a.ah,,a /1..3 3";z"J the -l/-t 1z1h;ty ta
ileDth ud scope in your introdnction.
l".t"t th"; /;r4 .ts 3ar"t.a".13 ah,t p.-p/e h.t/" 1/te ..lila/ a.d
Cl€neni ho$tver, beAins with lars€ly
l".hh-/-g.J k -,--A-tu 1.4.*" ;'r"h1,-.3 ti./ J'3c,.,/"r;"s 4-'--r"t '
seneric infomation about globalisation, thcae ;,a.ch1,ahs .h! J3.,.,/ur;es a.t -h/,/ seea;ry/'/';af)-fe oar /;t 5
bnich contflbxte\ ven lirrle to buildrng .s -" l"/;",/" aztts./v"s 1o l" a.r" c..7alh 'n sah;.5 -at 7r-l/"zs
conndence that lc cctucll\ kno$s the Out irr.s7-zs;l/" asa7" -{ th} 2",- Lz.J a}'/;1y azy ..use as 1-
issue. He then Iollows $irh a \asue

/;re ., /;fe 4-t3e thaa lefot"' th"r.;h ftsa/1;ry 'h th" ,t"k/" ,oh"lh"r

ehbodtinn ofthe asuF a nd c d ktu lbi;sh I

srmplisti.stand,.unsdcrinEthe.nntent I
sc;.h1;31s sha.l/J l" Esf-h';//e ;n "..'l/;ry as d;1/1 "",- ..t'.,1;/i1;8,
ove'viewle €Yrla red ,ah;eh eaz l" a,s14"J A .i.7 ih Lr,o/-.r -f the .-/1et e s(;e/li.r1s

.-l tteld .c.-'./.Ja e 'ta,,/

I J/larlJ 1c

2ND PAMGMP|| A"dnoDeuins n"int-e

erpe(t ethe, fotrnLlat,oncl lbasic but t C4laih/y,..3.'",1'sl ;. 4//','i.zr
rmDortantl cupnortior your staod to b€ '3 a)-l Dhn'h .'h/y a;h,t,v;Jt1.,/ ^';111
i.rr.dDc€d or the $e ot one of vou. I thc ,e.ess.ry ;hl"//".l ,1h,,/ 3k;//3 ..o a"d"ft.*e ..',/ 5- /-h9,i3 /1.
stonqestoointstobes,nto.on{..e;.ut I fu/r/s h;sr-l ft?u;teaehls .tt tlte "h/ ./ th" ,/a,t, -h'.h B 1- ;d"h1
auihence to draNth€m,n.This is
sc must emnhds,€ tlc rmlo afce ot
-r JB..ret s-aet/1;ry th.1 .tu l" -r l.rcr1 1- th" sd;"1'/' h" has
;1 berc la l" -3"J ,
"s/'an;l/t lyctltu
ataN;nJ 7h"

ma(ro knowieds€ oi tie rssue ln itselt I "- -l/b.,1;ah;{

J/tq'1e Dh;.}t ?3"/ l- h"/l 4;.er3 l r.//a.'l/e
there is nothins c\s€ntrallv wofs kith I
;'{e.1,-h -f das
the loa c that clement dscs in tl,is I z,n"ruls {r-a 1/e ".i1h /1as tu,- e/-k"/ ;.1- d Jek.31al'4 {-r.1" ./'
paraa.cnh hut wrthout rd€qtratt I ,t"s1tu.1;-. Dh|h D;// erehlaa//,/, thte./:"h th" dii31",,." -l;h/

unilerstcndineof rutrentdeveloDments,
po,nts will h; madc out ol (onre\t and
;{ a3eJ ,.r se/rsh hce,!3. 1:1 ;3 lheftLte ;//a31tat",t th.1 5-.;e1y I
aDoccr trivial. The useofthe d\manrite
,3"/f slt jp"s th" a3e3 cf;,/eh1;-ns .aJ dE.,rr"r'.s ...'J 3/t-a/,1 i1 L
piample illustrates this idea $ell. I
?s"J ;..ry,'q lzd l"'4 l"rencia/ 1- aa,);t L'o11/J le d'sastt.t.s
D\namire s€s nJtentcd rn rBbT Clement I 5.;e.1313 /1.{" h- ;htt;,s;.'-n;l;/;1y 1- a""l -kt ft"'13 -t :r"'5"^'"
,sqrtine Jn ssal brsPd on issuesin the
\car 2oo8. Clement could h^e at least
-ar zotrily lat ;1 ,3 the 5-rd hae,ts ^'h- a" r"?a,re/ 1- /- th;':
thouaht c lirrle nroft (r4r yecrs aheadl
q"h." ;t ;s nol a c-2,:"rn ./ 3c;ch1;3t3, le..4s" ;1 ;3 ler/..J thc;t

anil rechsed that his Dornt was o\er\ | al;/'1y t- J- 3a.

sLmplistic rnd madetora bad start. I

16 Sc0aDrq Pr o\Pl0llt5 J/. .'; ..d, /it ui rs.

aln-a3/{ :;.;e.1,513 cLtet 1- lhe 3pe.;t. J"a.3ttfh,.:
3t-uf ,h 3.r'e1y tt6l ae ./raq1) .'ha ..a ./ t.t t/e 1"chn.f1y
+.." th" t--1 sl"as ,t-a 1/1e Dea/1/y,is t/1"y.t" 3nD PARAGRAPH rrris $as probably
l/p arc5 thal .chtr-,/ llE D-r/ thzls t"s?-n,l/. L,r among the $eakest points in the ess.y.
full ofsweeping stat€nents about the
.r"at,Z ?t-!"as a3,ry te(hrc/-jr' 7 )Fftt-ft ;t stbz.// l. th. rich and eli1e, Clenent made mary
.-h.erh -f 1/1e e/;le ;. .aJ h-Z s.i.h1;sts. It ;s .,h/r, assumptions rboLt a gtuup thatjnst ould
the )'./1 1/1a1 c,h t.;n ;h thc ;/k af t/te r;./t. Ih a fni.t;..a/ rot be substantiated vith evid€nce.
Having said thdt, it rvas telling that therc
s.t;e1,/,,..// r-;.es .te,trct-,ft,t -.".1 c\tey' th" ,;.h 1".,a3" th",/
was no €xample n€ntior€d to back up
c. lret "^/",t 1- k ,?-,*,2/ .6 lAe Lp.1/1h they /1.a/" ,...1/a1t/d"/ his claims. Stndents rvill do w€ll to renind
3eea3 t- aar, lktl thy h.d
"32r,/".1 btu-/-b" ./,t adcEt./,t;3 th.mselves that il tb€y cannot lind
-, the ,--t/J 7h;3 /etiles j-r4ha?hzs slaal'"J ,-h"n,t",,/,zq cxamplcs lor cldims it means none disls
,;1h th",t,t"32a6;l/".t1s le.at6e .{ the;r ;aae6e ;,{/aede or .vcn if any did, points rvithotrt
exanples cannoL be crcdited rvith mnch.
det 4a^// t.s.sac' 3.k1/1 ..3 e.ah-a,., jt-D1/1 al E thet eLft clcnent could have easily adjusted his
efe. 4-re t4l-33;l/e t-r .t.;e,1;313 l- r-;.e the,t .-..eths as poinr ly dhcnssing coryorate conbol over
1/te;r 31ah./;ry '3 aa.h /-aer 1ka llt" S-.rernzeat .aJ acte-fet lh. dircction resedch n moving md made
t h"' r,t -l s,t",l :;1:4" -. h.11 lJ t her/ . /t// /e h}c t re,;. A'rp r er-J e, his entitu point far more palatabl€.
s/t.h,s ,.// tfch 1/t. slt-a/.tej 3 -/ lhe -lhet Itch
;,/7ae't;.1/ ?e.,/c tE ;1 ;s s;mp/f 1-, he.w a.-,f eth Lj s.,a1;51s

M-ftdct) th. r..f,s1,t: t--ru ret/cre:t :;1!.:.:ca.: .,.d +ae 4Ttl PARAGRAPH w" -"ta
this point bett€r. Clement liam€s this
.hJ h6 l,s1tun1"J .s.tehl,.;1.t &rty 4-a 14e;t resp-fi;li/,1;cs
argtrnent in the context of a reahstic
rvo.ld and in ger€.al tbis is a b€li€vable
,t;3.-fctr, -t.:/-.;4 /1tls .)-h -/et a.,,/ 7".?h ..//i3 ;1 .h point, str€ngthened by his concluding
aa..z;hj Jerel-?aeht: ;h;,n.s h31.ry th-4/r ..t;t,.3 ti,jae statement that shom two kel hcto6 $ hy
scientists care l€ss about the use of th€ir
"al^/,-./-.;hj h.s c/tt//"1"t tlr s.dtl;1r/ ct /;te ,r,J t/1" la3;c
inventiors. This poi.t would have
ti1/ns 1c ;h/'\/i,ta.f,1y ,-A;.h h.i .,// .,/-e Le, /.*eh />r benefited from the trse of spe.ific
//t" .slE"t "\r;/"a"ht -ret 1/1e .ea /,3.d.ty ha5 lta,."r"t /"J *dples N well s m ei"ansion of *o])e
na"y,t- lut. a Jet.f e... 1- tto/ro."h/s ./,i,h;3 h-,- ./-.;.3 bruadening the discussioD to an issue over
thre.le^t /:hc /i h&/;ah af.,ltnllt hda.'h.t /,fe a,/ -hal ta:;et,/ the nedical benefits of biotechDolosr.
;i lz1;/1 a/,ah l"eaus" J,3.-/er;c3 .aJ ;tue,1;-hs .te seeh
'I P
i.;enl;313 ae thete/bte h-1 .-'.cthc/ d;Zh tlte u3e ar lltc;r
;h/eh1;o's lts /:lEy .see e.t /1 .4r.h..eaeht .6 t,c3r4t ;' lhe;)
..n..t .o/ ;, e1/, .lis€ .teh.r ek. he/.t d.-2,1,1/" 1i /h" 3"."r../

t SR0ADlR PiRSPfUlVf\ rl,.\ripDrf .(' rplnii., t\i/r


5Tl| PARAGRAPII rni. po:.t i. -t."uy

idenLical to the point rais€d t$o
paragraphs earlier. Esscntjallytbe point
still argues that scientists hale to .ater
to the needs of th€ €lite or tle wealthy.
Ihis common problen vety often occus
whcr students writc witlout a cledr
nenlal pictue of how lis a.Sument
should develop brfualher der€loP each
loinL in isolation, nercly thjrktug along
the lines of for and dgainst. we noti.e
that tIe.e is cl€ar eridenc€ of a"1ruzt-rs aty t+1a" th./ 3.;eht31:t .,d 1/teit 'tueht;chs e'r'31
dgumenrador wherc Cienent brings in Lr th" 9t",1"r j--,t o/;./ h-1 .,/y thc e/;tca' 1/12.t they .t"
ar opposing point of view ard
this out with a convjncing rebuttal. He
a.n bdngF in d etuple. reintercsting sc,"ft;.rt.s J- ^1 .,,31 1- l"*/;1 th. ".1;t- hda.4,-Pa/at,-h
tling to note is Nhy Clement codd .D"re/.?a".15 ;n i/alaI2r.L-n -n/y l"."Ut t.t1"l"J 3t -aPs MeJ;.trcs
inhoduce an dample for this !oi!t btrt J- n-1 lercta1 1/t" t-ar ts th"/ are ia/y f,."/ ot-i -{ t/t" rec,ett
rot the previous, €ven though they a.e
-{ th" p@r .a'd h-,- atz.h 1-J,a/ hare kF seeh a.r.a.eae,l ;h ae&.d
s.;.,'." 3kL./ /:-,-,r'ds ,..;a/ aa("-r'"E d r/a31;. s?ryery 8a1->
.is .o "\aap/" ,//as1tut6 1ltis .E// .,3 .t/".r/y ;tu"h1'-ns /;k" th's ,+"
6Ttl PARAGRAP|| n i"i. *"tr-.*"r
.-t .t".l"J Lr 1/1e p-a/ 3/1-t'3 lh,1 3.,"h1;313 .re hot .a .er,e4
the b.tter argued poinLs that Clement ,.',1.t hao t11",/ ar" us"J a/1h-agh th"/ shaztlJ "th;ca//'/ l"
raisa. Develop€d succinctly and $ith the
same intoduction ofan opposirg point
of vien folowed br his own auumeDts.
Otlt"rs,t,t l"r; ry ; h at;.;-, ma/' 3a53e31 lha/ 3.;"ht:;3t3 aF
Ii is a pity lowever the Clcnelt was not r-h.etreJ ,./-L4 /1at., the't i,'/eh1,.hs a" as./ Lcats. -f;,,.t.."5;.j
able to raise clea. examplcs a n d did not t-.:"rns i-a 3.,eh1;513 -n t/1e el/..13 -f tlte;t ;,/e'1;-n .h lhe
finish olf his larag.aph with a vital .*;t-nz"n1. -fh,s ;5 u/,a"h;.//y 1t1/e .5 sc;e,t'513 ft.f;ze th.A L/l;/e
concluding statement thar would have
made rhc link bet\rcen his point ard th€
th"y htat" "xJ/e/ aak'/,t 1- ha'. o ;*:r".,s"/ 31./k/ar,! ol /;r;,! lb4/tt
aloza ly a 3r"t/ '/.t;ely ahl ?aah1;ly -t 3.o/5 a,td" riva;/al/"' y"t
;.,Jdntn./'s./;-. /1,i3 /eJ l- 7-//zt1;a o,t "*;t -h4",1../ Jd.g" 5.;41;n5
a.t, ,-n ha-dt l" a1,/e 1- aq"r co,:t"/:" 3t"r3 ta r"s-L" ;1 k .us.
c.,p;1.!/;.ta h6 1"". z.ite 1o-;-heteht ,h -/1t 3d;.1y 1- l" 1-1.,1'/'
** *.1**t read"J lat 5.;ch1;31.5 /1.i\.e r-;.eJ 1/tc;r .-rEerh.5 t. c..l: J--h -h
onclusion and w6 admitlcdl:i do.e in a
fiDal nsh to finish on time. stDdents do ..nlah en;ss;ohs.
Dot alvays lully alpr{iate how imPofant
the condusion is to w.ap uD our Zh ..h./23;oh, 3.;e,l;313 eann-1 tnJ ta n-1 htv" t- l"
a.gnments. This wonld have bcen a good
place to sum uD our nactu mdeFtanding
r8tdn,//e ,-r .ttt;Z;a3 a.h(;'J tuth tuL Lu"4 ..,o.J,/,t;4 l""
of the situation and closc np onr of tal /at.!:.'ca/ re.,'dt .6 ;1 ;s h.'t ;h lh.;t 3f,4"t" al,fl2".,:"
ahd hat. s.a;ety Jes h-1 h-// thea .c.oah1tJ/" 4-,*t"\1h"r" a"
arSunerts. Clen€rt did not have eitber.
This was not so nnch becaose of a lack 3.;crlB* '.h- are ;/,1ee/ .-,t"tkJ .'l-d th" Tral/"zs ttr;s;ry /t'a
in Clement's skills but mthd a lack in the;t ;hrchti.hs a.J /1.n" 1.". aattc ;hherchl ;h 3a.,c1y thd t/E;r
Clenent's content und€rstdding tlat did
rot allov him to see the bigaer Djcture. a.1;ahs a^/ /e./ o1l1et310 le/;ere tlt.y te,,i231 la/:/:;hq -h.a

l8 BR0ADtR PtR5PtolVtS r/L .f nr.r,\' /.l,ti, rr i55r,'


llSc.;tteieS ar,e uSel iS n,cl l/rc

r'/<>t-t iwenti<:>nS anJ
ca,Tcet/1 a{ lh. sc).nlisl. }o you a3r."?
'tbday s scientific frcnt is fraught with contrrwrs,! ovcr thc usc ofscicntific iDlcntioDs and
discove rs. DcrclopmcDts ir thc arcas of biotcchnologv, nuclear technology and
nanotcchnolosr tonameiust a fei{. havep.ompled lhescienliUc community Lo be hr nc,re
caulioLrs in $hat the! are pioneering and €v€n to discuss the levelofresponsibiiirr'scientists
shouklbeir. XlaD) irveDtjo$ and discoleries seemiDgly inprc\'e ourlives, but scientists
beliele that these ue short term gai$ that nay tum a$1]' iD thclong ruD. ScicDiists shonld
be more responsible or at least coDcemcd iD cducatiDg thc cornmunit_v and govcmments
ovcr thc irnplicaiions ofthc discoledcs, if not outright taling leaderc|ip in tlese areas
thcD$chrs. This however is rnLrch easiersaid than done as scientists haye to conrplyrvjlh
both econo ic and politicaL limitations $ Dmcli as:uv other citizeD ofthjs modeni rarkl.

Certahlr, thejob of a scientist is a special tositioD that vcrl'fci{ caD fill, brirging $ith it
urli.tue rcspoDsibiliiies to bingbcncfitto socicty. Yct, as thc scientistbings nes'knowledge
and tcchDolosics into thc $'orld, h. c.nnot be cxfecied to be Ield responsible lbr elery
Dcw aftli.ation oft|al lnowledge nor nlisuse olhis ew lechn.Jiogies. Developnents in
nlclear tec|nologies illuslrale this pojDt wellas scientists clearly see the potentirls as ilell
as dangers that tiiis discoveLt can briDg. !_ct, sln dNc lt, roguc statc or tcno stb Dg
devastation to tlie h nuD racc, lvc oftcn foint fing$s stmig|t at goycrnnrents that Iale
fxilcd io sccurc thcsc tccbnologics aDd not t|e scieltist !v|o discovered tiren. lhis does
not mcaD th.t scientists are devoid olresponsibilitv bul ralher Lhat jn cases like this the
e{tensive Lrse oftechnologies as powerlLrL as this will olten be taken out ofthen hxnds.
E\en ifscientists were conce.ned. it$ouldbe oflittle use.

Thcsc days, scjcDtists oftcn also nork for major corpomtions w|o invesl healily in
tcchnological rcscarch, h.nce nranv conrfoveNies in lhedelelopnenl ottechnolog.' ne rs
tronr exe.utn? decisions made b! (hese companies. Lver ilscjentjsts $.aDted to be coDcerned
about Lhe connne.cial use oltheir discoveies ther \roukl Dot be in a positio! to.ljctate
u'hat they feel is the co.rect diection. In crpitalistic societies, the corforate voic. oftcn
h$the nDst sayard exerts grcatirflucncc orrhowsocicryis shat.d. Evcn gov.n DcDts
thcmsclvcs lra\c a hard tnck..pnrg conrpanies nr c.|ect, nNC.| less scientists as enrployees
of these companies. Detracro$ nia! argLrerhat scientists and theirinventions exist 1b. the
s,reater good olmanldnd nnd not sinidy fc,r rich corporatioDs. Iderllytliis ma) seem so.
but jD reaLit). scientists are as nNch victims of market forces as arrrnody else. Just considcr
our irvestmeDt of time and rcsources in applyiDg science to dcrelof cosmctics and bcautv
treatments rs opposcd to mcdical hratrncDts for th. poor. Sci.ntists should be coDcemed
o!$thisNarycd rnisrptrot ation oiscienlilic lnorledge but can do litue about it.

l9 BR0,{DtRPtRlPttTlvt5 rif'!?&,??iaion riJ,(l



4/lernative slanJ
anJ VointS lo eonSiJer
ldeally, scientists should be concerned:

scientists are in unique positjoD, where knowledge and uDderstanding c,ftheir

inventions is priry to them aloDe- Governments may have aD executive .ole lo
legislate science bLrl even drey dcfcnd on scientist's daLa and rcscarch to make

the comnunit!, at large thtrs expects scieniists to takc grerter role, moving
oD a
into the public e)€ and elucidatiDs us on the delelopments they are mrking and
the resultaDt conlrovemies. ScieDtists need to assume tositioDs ofleadership
bcing the best advocates for theif owr research.

In addition, the unprecedented powcr bestowed b) science and

technologr-' today should compeL scientists to take responsjbility
and possiblt even liabiliil for the effects ofthei. inventions.

Yer practicaly, ever ifthey are concerned it makes litde differebce, mfing
it pointless to do so:

It is nDfortunate theretbre, that scientists these dals are often under acoDtractuaL
obligation to the llrms thal |ife thcn, or even the
states that support their
ID a case where the scientisl js merely an cnployee and not a lree ageni. iibccones
didlculi for then to tale individLral rcsponsibility as tlty cannot always be accolurtable
lbr their oMr actions.

Market forces o. economjc factoN are also often n ch stronger thaD the scientist s
abili\ to control the use olhis invcntions or ctiscoveries. He nrayb. corceDed,
bui poi{erless to change the generally anorrl direction that today's coDsuner
nrark€t may choose to go.

Political intervention or national agendas also often bccomes an issue for nan)
YOURESSAY'? scientists. Lacking the auionomyto set agendas themselves, scientists often have
to adherc to the lead of the govemncnt they work fbr. Scientists want to
be onccmed, but politicaL apathr is unfofuDately the choice mnny make in rcsponse
to the por{crlcssness thev feel i initiating ]mliiical charge.

"ESSAY I AKriOVr]R" In a very utilitadan scnsc, the bokl pioneering naturc ofreaching breakthrouSls
nr science and techrologysimply does not allow a scientist to bc overly concerned.
Being pedaDtic and overly cautious is hadly the mindset a pioneer should adopt
ind would ultimately cornpromise the ke)' intention ofilhat the scientist nccds

20 ER0lDtR PlRSPttTlVtS tlescience& rcli.rion

c(t,(JMN /



How would A NEO-LUDDITI and A HINDU IINESCO BURF-AUCR\T respond since

they come from such diverse belief systems and working agendas? Our wdters get
under their skins to find out.

CONIEXI / Sure, science prorides us maNelloN E)a{IIPLES /

solutions, but are we too quick to chase down a) The nreritable international narch toe,ards stem
technologies that we do Dot undeFtand tullv? I'Iore cell research due to global competition: GerTnon
than tliat, do rve have the systcms and strategies to and US ldi,indkers ease limits on sien-cell 4 CONINION
hardle the technolosics if they go aMv? Such fears rcsear,:h due ta competitionf otn Asiatl countres. EXAITTPLES /
lead many to preach a far more cautionary approacli
to the management ofscience - advocating ethical b) Lcsal oDDosition fron concerned citizenn to the
watchdogs, govertrment regulatjon aDd control of sta{ up ofthe Large Hadron Coliider (Luc)
tunding for But what maDv scieniisis fea.
is that nany iD thc public and indeed s'ithin the .r ApprcrJotoFnrl ' lmp-rl3\sdr. n rnJlst, .i".
I'r'.ar.r. v do .ot \"n $.llin for research or for coDsumptioD: B/ifi:si s.ienn:srs
place their tears may be fbunded more on
the first succeed at tnakiq hundn cow embrqos and
bad science fiction movies than real scientific Anleticai FDA apprcues clones as safe lbr eanng.

d) UNllScO's 1997ban on htrma! clonins

wonan h.Mng .figurine af $esarre Srreer s.ienr6l cloracl.r A?.td l'rro Io cRrjDn / iV lcot, flickr Creatiu Contnons

21 8R040[R PIRSPIO VtS r,le sci.rc€ & rdioion rssre


A Neo-Luddite Answers
LudrJ.itesofthe past smashed any machine they could find. Though generally
less violent, today's Neo-Luddites are more educated but no less disdainful
of our obsession with technological solutions. ,ls conceived,bv Marv r,ee

How far should Science be regulated?

o one $'as listening fivc years ago robot hunans would $iD! I lruran rcbots would display
rrhen I said our technolosical occasiondl liuman taits. while robothumaDswouLdn t,
advancemeits ivere leading the so allihcir decisions $'ould be deroid ofthe (hunan)
human race doxn the path to emotions that so often slow trs doe,n (which is tlot a
obsolescence. At that iine, I called for b-'llnjng,. cl1 . . il rn FllisP r F . rnde"r DroF" r"
a halt to potentially dange.ous scientific research. Yotr {ay b€tond $'hat a programmcr is able to conirol- I
all laushed and p t nre in the r.tnks ofNco-Luddite know, it\ iroDic, considering that I starled as a
| -r |\d. )?ln.L.: S, InFonp e\, r :r1 u"rd mP of
|8 programmer 25 yeaN ago.
a q'pical Ame can rvho had devcloped technolosl,
bccane superj ich because ol iL, and then cried wolf' What is morc nnid-bLowing ihaD the facl that scientists
to siop anyone else from going do$n ihe sanie path Li.- r .c"pd' d r' ,li irpuhLir nl r-r., i. Prgrr , .ar'8
'Ihdrs a cti. $hdl'1"o,\, up-Ll.oJirr.. Jrr"!.:nB (sclecti\ety manirrulating the genes of plants, animals
lo .oirail d' \i g cn'rr'l i-\ lrorn .n .l rt or humes to creale pcst-resistnnt and vitanin fortified
sreeDhouse sascs after first pollutins the world and vegetablcs) is the hct that nore and more states are
bccoming rich and powerful. Adcrica's IDA has actually
app.oving ofthis.
lhcit stamp
given cloncd aDimals and Plants
'Ihat\ not it. Ilave )ou $'atched l Tre ,ludt d,rvhere of approval lor consuturidr' And Rritish
nores, d lls our reality and\irhal realitr are battling to control the s.icIli\l\ ha\c r, luall] su.(ee,l.d irl
hunanity or simtly rcal rvorld? or sdlh dtl, where people are clore.t ensineernrg a humaD-co{ scncl$'hat possible
kills our tradiLions and "ne to life? Or I, Robot, rvhere powcr_
and abl€ to retum regeneratirc medicine$ould such a monstrous h) brid
hungry robots fiBhi Manfor coltLrol ofthewo.ld, $€ll, produce? Alrcady, the nrilitary fantasises of creatirg
Lo. Alge. ., l Dnlo.r n.n" ,l of.l ' rr".i". senetically enhanced humans witli bionic capacitv
are jusi fisments of nnasination? Think asainl \' F,I ran:r Iu., ,, ,n lld,t c, le\:/rdal "'/.,a
r|. hrre m.nster$as the atnbilious doctor driven io
Rly Kurz$'eil, the deservedly famous inventor of the stealingcoryses lo cobble togelherhis golern?
first reading machnie fo. the blind and nany othcr
anrazirg ihings, told me that the accclcratiDg rale of All these sross experimenis are being carded out
technological improverncnt was n1al<ins it Possible uDde. the guisc offfiding curcs for cancer, AIDS,
fo. li,sel Fuse? l.enarl<ed, shocked.
us and robots to AlzheinH's, diab€tcs, Pa.ldnson's. Thev'rc going do$n
Yes, said RaL thanks to genctic engineering and tl p..rnn . rll ?.pd-.l r rlr. \pl dlllh' rr pFr L'ra _..
Danotechnolosy. The outcome ofthis ould hc one behind sten celLresearch arc still unableio deaLwith
socicty will Dot bc Nhere hunan efficiency woDld be naxinizcd the simplc question: Whai happers to the excess
con!.rtcd ro his causc (Oh dcar,I feLt, who Nants to be a machine?). I Iuman enbryos creaicd? where s ihc etlics govemingtheir
and instcad soldiers on beings $ould sani immoltaliv. ReaLLt, I thousht Onl,v use? What\ to stof a neo Nazili om creating a tnasrer
varning us lihe a
vain people want imnorlaliq,, I said. But then, robots race" in tliis millenium?
dooNd.y prothet on
arebynalure (ifyou]l pardon the puD) inmorial, so
a her our tedmologicdl
shenarigans rvill get $.

22 ER0ADtR PtRtPtOlVtS t/r. scien.e & reit rion d$rt

st tNct IIHtt5
has . |ugealgelical Ch.istirn cultur and Snrgapore
has a st.on$ Dnrlti-religiors basc,t|crc hrs been o RfltGt0N
atleqn to put sone musclc iDtothe reseNaljo s tliat
relisious sroufs havc aboui steIn cell research. WA]IH TH]S

.'....,,, d- l,. iirLF|aal ,t: , rp.,.


llinallt, thereis the rttcmpito find drc Cod larLicle''

or the brsis ol crcation. lhe source of light,
r,.':,-li,.JldsJ , ,-F,' .i.'t.. r!.t. IHRISTOPHIR DITHIR]VI:

t00KllG tvDElHt
To do this, thc rvorld s largest and highest cDcrgv
p!ftclc rc..leraLor lhe Large Hadm Collidcr or
LHC l)as b€etr built. Dothos. fhvsicists care lhat d/136
lhe) risli the destNction of our flanel'/ Ol (ourse
notl I st{Dd bi ihc lcAal oppoi;t;on froDr
concemeal citizcnry lo lhc sla up ofthe LHC
- rrc should not tu.n Lhat aton sm{sher on till $r 0iliL rywile irtl{pper fg
,J\''1,.,l.,rF Ur0!u, rl , 1l .r- ^hi,e
minaLure bLack holes will rot bc crcatcd b!the LHCl
Physicists niayarguc that t|ere is Lro basis lorsuch
fers'and that olrishs are impossiblc
assessmeJrLs f.,l)
bccaN. of inconrplete, eyeD fundaDentallyflai{cd
standard nrodels oIpafticle phlsics. Thatjlst proles
t|q slrould not go ahead xith it, don'i r''ou t|ink?
Eut I am Do loDgcr dccNing the lict that Do oDe
s.cDN ilteFsled in lbrcjDg these scieDtists bcnt on
lLlstea.l of aDs\criDgth.s. soul searchiDg ctuestio!s, rcscarclrdoilr dubious patlis to abidc by an ctlir'al
all we hcar is thc rnanfua ol stem cell researchers: ,i,rid In,i..iIIi ..,'LI,', \,l ecoroIic
stcm c.ll therafl has the potential to draDraticallr,- suicide" argurnents. Wcll, Dron.v isr'i everythjrg.
change dre lreaLrneDt ofhunan discasc. But does LleD UNISCO dc(idcd to ban hu,nnn clonirg
rhis noble souD(lirs justifi thc Drcans? What s in 1997'adccision globallr accepted and advoc{ted
lhe noral point $'c want to mike {he we build a b1 countnes lile l.rarcc. Japan and TuDisia $'hich
life-saiiDg sollltion uDon a stackofenbrp corl)scs? all asreed tlrat human clonins i{ould devalue Lhe
dignjt! ot humaD beings aDd natural hunan
I am sad to see the ;nevitable iDtemrtional march reproduction. This rras a decision not based oD
to\{.}ds sten) cell research bccausc of simple eronomjcs but on furc realisaljon that we sinth
'onr. L., rnr,D:Ihl I s l:,$ rr'l,cr\ hat ing cannot cnablc \'|at palcht knowledge $'e have to
to erse up on prc\ious linils sel on stenl(ell lcad ns do$'n the gardeD prth ofa moral (or litm.l.
reseuch.nd ftrndingduo lo (oDlpctition fi onr ir the cas€ ofihe LIIc) blackhol.l
lcss rcstrictirc, hore pr{gmatic lsian D.tions
likc Sorth l(orea.l am vert concemcd t|at a loung 'lo parapluase Dotcd fastoral luiler Ricli WarreD,
coonL..' lile Sinsrpore isbccoDrins. Iaven lb. stem i{e reallv arc but rnis t.)ing to understand thc
cell research as jt aspircs to b. a bio edicaL liub. IntcrD.t.I shonld know:t helped poi{er the Int.rDctl iE0UTTHl,fltIiR
SjDgrpore has b.cD able to atLract rnanr young So, $'|at I want lo do ros'is to design a tutur. of rnv
Etrropcan and Arnerican scientists $'lD hav. bc.n choice: choose $'hat I $'ant thc future io looli like.
liustrated br their own rountries' iass rcstidnrg llre rnd rork tonards t|at. at
use ol certain lines of sten cells. ftough SoLrlh Korca

23 BR0ADIR PtRSPtO VtS t/rrs.t.,r.r€.t lrliqion iss!c


Bureaucrat Answers
Working day to day on global problems that could have been easily
solved by the right technologies would incline anyonb to support less
regulation of science. As conceived by Arnellia Razak

How far should Science be regulated?

cience is strange and beautifuli biolog,\' ofcmbrylnic stem cells is what the scientists
solLrlion to Nlan s nany in UX hope to do by jnserling hnmaD DNA into
but surely moderating its progrcss is
enough as opposcd to eliminaling it hollowed eggs doivcd ftom caLtle. A Nco-Luddite
conpletely? I anr apfalled that $ere arc .nr ' ,.q s"ll i\ .har li.l-'brid nd-", hnnd . '
those who call for science to be qnashcd especiallv mark of nanufadured as opposed to organic ljfe but
that God is beloDd $lren s.ien.ehas madc life bea ble for the sick. and I do not bclieve ae are dullnrg ourhunaDity when
sil€n hope to the abject. Scieme should be only mildly this sobstitution protects rather thaD destroys the
nodolheisis h!u1d htrman egss. Likewise the Us Food and
hx\c mo.e doctrnral
res ated and Neo Luddiies ca g forsciencetobc
ol put on a bal and chain I fcar, be a danger rather Der€topmeor A horitr GiDA) publishcd a rcpoft
objcdioDs wirh son€ '!ill,
sciencc\ erlr€Ne ..ntJ r;pr-, i\a'-forn it or'"buJr.on.,,l rcnl.. r'
milk andmeatproducts obtaincd froni cloned cattle
ln this Dew ilorld ofscicntific progress. the march in 2c)l16, concludirg ihat consuneN have nothing to

Tho IrN Fdn.aiional. "sr-d .r-r , .. du, lo rlub.'l .ompel'r'n be wary ol Ifthcrc has been approval ofgerelic
lot research
Scicntill. and Culrural
is inevitable. The .ed ction in stem cell research wirh aDimal species
Organisation fundnrs nr the USA has resulted in established or consuDrption, thcn I aD rr€ there is no need
{UNEsco) ad!ocares Dames loolins for more scientific necdon abroad, fo. scicntific expLoration to be kept on suc| a tight
thc actLjfg ol global andwhat with Gcmany abolishing its 2oo2policy
ethical slard..ds a.d allowing its scientists to usc or y existing cell lincs,
forges !nive.sal the racc to becom€ the biggesi biological hub is on. EsseDtially if sciencc $'ere to be regulaicd, global
agrt.nrc ts on the
Singapore's focus on the research-irtersive sector cthical sta|dads have to be set lirst, an cxample
handling of ethical
issu.s. UN ESCL) to diversi{y its econonic bale confimN that science benrs UNIISCO'S 1997baD on human ctonils.
bnrc.uorts $.orld is advancing at a speed nerer before knoim to eist, it is not ne.ely globally acccpied, but adlocated br-'
locus on t}e need to and t{,ing to rcgulatc tiris speedy gro$1h caD cost .o' rIr,, ..r' I r' I ran.c. lrpxrr an(l Iunisir
diss.ninale and shar€ Nhich all agrec that cloning undeDnnres the dignity
counties more than its econonv.
scientilic knoNledg€ so
of liunaD beings andthe concept ofnailral human
the rvorld c.n Drc$es.
They would quesrion Where ethics is coDce.ned, you would e\pect my rcprcduction. ln accordaDceto ny beliei!, every mar
$hcthcr teor,!ddites paDtheist belicfs to ciash $'ith that of m)' motrotheist is onc i{itli all beings in ihc cDtn€ uDileNe. The Luritr
in all Lhei. ot€r peers, but surprisingll theytoo see no objcction to of all selvcs neam that if I hann aDother man, I harnr
protcctiveness, $ill '\! ur nJ \.Fl.e d\ J pi!.o. dn !\dr n tv.r 's I myself: Good corlduct and risht cthics are the highest
harn the verv thnrgs of dharma andirust nie when I say that the UN has
counilcss problems. lve agrcc that exploring sciencc
ther want to save
does not bv itself pose a threat io maD or liis humaniry achieved this delicatc aDd enormously difiicult task
in thcir obsri nac,t
rdva s tccbological but it is what nc do reith the discovcry tliat could of providing n moral framervork to scieniific
solLrtions a.d gi!iDg ha.n or violate codcs ofethics. UnderstaDdiDs the
scientists tne ar€edon

24 BR0ADIR PtRSPtfilVts r]t. s.ien.. & reliqion tssle

P0t. T t5
( tlitt ftIc!
lt G]lN

!rr1(ll lH S

II 1 nlu 7.t.tuL n1 L.! nqd n,\'. (vr rcd ro n/lidex p rp/
ro rt! r/id/'251
]r r! i,rLix! |lLdJ l lrnrr (,niur

Th. LTNESCO s d.di.rLior lo strllii,,g a brhnre

b.h!..n rh. 11!o is Lerll,,r),r\ 1o tlLe li(tthats(icntific
ln.$Itlle, r. be slrrcd lDl disicn utcd for gl(nll

Thctho ght ofhtilg nr.\tliil o ,1).dil\ t\isterire

$'iihout $i.n...rosrs Dr\ nri.(lr1 Li,i,es Jlrirli01
it tI.: rbur.. ol 1h..|.irrisl,r. biolo{r xDl tlLe
t|rsi.s .l .\. i \1 iirs ro!ld leare us grrtirg ir thc
dr,lt. ,!1 l,rlirillrir. \hicl) is $hv lcsrl opposition
lr) lh. strrt up ofihc l-u$e IhdroD collklc.
(l IIC) mryrisrd nxi. \\hilLi I und.rslrrd tll. rliL,1,,
oftht globll connnunitr Nl lhri lll.,,9lll .1 r,ri(ro
bhck lol.s i..1slIn11.l{.Ls rjrr)err i,,s o!l ol the L]IC.
this is 1. ri\tliLir tl,e rirlure olniatter. to
tind ll lh. lllsg s lro{ni e\ids.I doubt lur htrmrDi\'
$oul,L lJe djscourled iD anv ${! clcn ilthc Big Brng
tlieor\ \'as tNc, or if IIigg s bosm ti\ist.d. li)r N,.
rr l i,r ', ,, " 1 ..
our-qchcs in qMrks.lctt..s and co!l(l nrerD
cvcNlhing.Dd Icl rlso .rn .o1l,j,,S: $e are rol
n..cssDilI ftr h.r fNrr lrcrrr ullerstanding the
di!in. rill o1 ltie!Di\erseil\!ehrvtthcirtclligcncc
lo (Lissect onrseh es to the rudirncnts olotrr {i\ist.nLr
and uDdrrnlld thrt rlc. lik. rll otl.r r.d
liling bcirgs, rrcjnst matt.r.

Scicn.c hrs r.,r.hed Lirl 1o Llre slrld.,\s r

tolclr I hrre \eer (hrnle l)olitics. Is a
, .lisilni s l! Lloler. I lrr\ e seeD it qurni(rl ixiths \\hrt
br ch.clcd? I do lot lnror! 1;r s,1,.
is scieucel'jCrD it
brt I harc frith thrt lhn \rill trtogni*i .lli.rnir
rn.l cloos. il 10 lnat 1l,e (oslrjc sell I rcalitv. f:

Onward, Singapore!
\'Yh\. Si[gapolcuns dor'L kick up a ss f lbout scicnce's elhicNI c(mtroversies.
Itv []hirtlig IIonjt ll.cul & ]iuili Shiao ] ill

n God is our trust.

God save the Queen.
Majulal.r Singapura.
While Americans
sing of God lcading them to
victory on the battlefield ancl
the Bdtish sing ofGod blessing
their Queen, Singaporeans
sing of progressing ton'arcls
happiness together.

If national anthems
encapsulate a nation's core
aspirations and noblest
it is quite plain
dreams, then
where Singaporc sta n ds:
our dream is to improve, to
excel, to climb the world's
socio-economic ladder one
industrious rung at a time.

% llR0,|jllPIR\Plil,'t5 /irrs,rrrr.!,rli,ii,,, ir,!

5URtI 5


STIl\,1 itI RtsIaRtH


tu ibenl !!v!irr rlilield

SHOWME THE I'IONEY/ \^'-ith her latesl plar to I1"S OII SO QTIIET/
achicvc cconomic success, Singapore is.aisnlg
The question is: If research into
cyebrows riortdlvide on a much ln.serscalethis time.
Singapore is positionirg herself as a scjencc hub. stem cells and cloning sets tongues
ra.ll,,h ..'rn .rr.'l J, .".l,"ld l .,d-r1,.,dr.. waggrng ever].wnere. wny are so Ir!nr!kd wirh thelr
that lured the world's best clcctronics corporations
Jl rlru.l ir.l, ro-^..\'rgJlar' r'.,rt.,il-,,8 few ofthose tongues Singaporean?
phannaceutical comfanics likc Pfiz.r and 1.)
\\'}ydon t Singaporeans bring theirconcerns about
sct uf shop, do t|eir reserrch and derelopment
scienlillc advances up to the socjetaLlevel or engage
wit]roul intefarence and pass on thei. techDologicrl
the 8o\€mnent in a constructive debate? Is it fear,
aprthr, ignorrDce or allofthe abovc? Couldthisjusi
The constrtrctjon of Biopolis and Fusionpolis
b' .. rn!,|"n, . - rl . ,, -- Jd) a lli.Ir g
SiDgaporcans? Stcrcot)-f icallv, most Singal)oreans
uDderscores Singaporc\ dctcDnination to fioneer
i .l. i..nt. e^vi rnr ,.r 'ti"l' F rr Jg,,.l' o, \oi,"
someihing rcvolutionarr-' iD the field ofscience. So
th.n unhatpiness |alfheartedlt, but thet ultinutell
docs hm rclativcly liberal lake on stem cell usage:
accepl these chaqes unquestionnUly. The occasiotnl
while tie Gernnn. A erican and British Lrwrnalers
diatribe iDthe FoNm pages isofteD outshonebythc
debate ove. \rhether sten cell rcsearch is taDtamount
govemneDt's repeated affirmations that such a
Lo Inueler ofernbrlos, Singapore pennits st.m cclls
decisioD is tukeD in the iDtercsts of SjDgaporc's long
to be taken from aborted fetuscs or discardcd
term economic stability- Thc disaffroval Lrsually
embryos, alloryins the en$rl'os to bc cloncd and kepl
subsidcs i{hilc drc rroposcd policies ar€ in\ten)enled.
for up to tao nccks toproducc sten cells.

The average Singaporean restricts his gielances to

This |as inspn€d asLun|ing reyerse brajn drah f.on
the coffeeshop or over lunch. Compare this to ihe
West to l]ist. Att.acted bI he. bold ambitioDs to
vehement opposition seen in B tain ir rcspoDse to
mik€ heaclivays ni science throush liberal laws and
the government's decision to pass a Bill allowins the
generous state fundiDs fron oycdoi{ing coffcrs,
cloning ofhunan'annnal h)'b.ids in March 2oo8.
\rorkl-renown scientists fiom.rafaD to IISA have
It polarised the Cabinet and set otr a war ofwords
relocated to Singaporc: gcncticist Alan Colman; tot)
b€tween senior Labour figures and the Roman
canccr reserrcherc Edison Liu. Sir David Lane and
Catholic Church. There can hardly be a starker
Yoshiaki llo; medici e speciaLisls Idwa W.llolnes
and P.olessorJudith L. S\!ain.

27 8R0,{D[RPtRSPttTlVtS I/r]s.'dr.r.{' rrtrnn r:eje,

Ad aDralganutio! ol lacto$ - a corse, !.tivc ,\si culLur. tlrat
vulu.s trcscNrtion ollh. strte o!e. (1. indiiidurl:a r.rLio.rl
ilclinatioDto$a s sellprcs.NrtioD rrd selJ:c.nsoNhip: a p,ess
thrt is norc r lafiner ol lhc statc and less ol. Natchdog ]lis
spailned a distinctilely Sir8aprcan menlalitr, oD. thrt is overl]

I cauthus ard seldom challenil€s tlrc gotenrnenl s dccisidis

'lhcsc.lo aldress r!h! SiDgapoierds tcnd t(r {i!l) drcir
li !sl tiinis !hut liol bnttrtr tuPics lll'. .ducrtidr. l,erl1h.rrc,
|ouslog rnd nicone ler Lls.

But these do notlrcb us !Jrd.tst.nd\ir tl,e gl.brl dcbrte o\ er

cthi(rL coirLrordsics iD scie... brrch regjstfrs.lliP oD llle
Singrforcr! cull,,hl fudrr. l|e,e rP|urs n) be li, .r.rc ntlnle
,.rsns whl Singrr).rc.ns do !!t lir L Llf r luss o\ er 1ll..tllicrl

cOl). lltIODIL\& IIIllI-IIrljSCIl.NCl.SlTlrcseLurrllon

of reLigio,, lj o.r thc strte t$ u.ll is thc relisi.,Ls Dulic!| o1 tlrts
Snrgafore!. .onrnnurit\ Inlslil hrlc nmch to (1. Nrth shxPi!,r,
slngrporcani subducil rcsf or!e

'llr drjnori\ olSi,,gr1)otr rns $,M d.nmal th. 30\ e r.mts


elrbi*rtioD on iLs tlll aDd crb, i(l jouDcr $ere !trinlr'
lioDr rf onotlrcistic reljgl.lLs.rnnnuritl€s. lIiD\ Sirgxloft rn
Chisti rs.,l.ivs !nd IlL, fiicl that (loi,jrill rnd c\fcrirnenLs
on hunln e,rbrlos rrc non!h qtr:hcnsible l,), lllcrfcrcei\e
.nbNos as ll!.rrd bcirgs mtde jn ood s inug. rd.l tlrus.
d.s.Nilg ofrigl,ls ln thrm. clorj.g Lrq!fs (ldls r'.hgrti\'.
lr A,LBust:oo1, tlie CNlllohc [1e(]j(rl G,Lild ofSirgrri,)r h.ld
r prr\.r $ssid t! f(\ rgriDsi .nli r1o. i. stcn !.llr en'Nrh

But the Irrio.itl of Singrto,.rns rrc n!L ol th. Drorotheislj(

tilhs thrt liavLr tIc most issLr.s lrith Sclen.c inr'ho\t.
Singapore is.+2 5% Bu(ldhist, belie!1lg nr a religior th.t hAs !o
th.ologicll co!11jct $'ith sciencc thrnls t{r its reb!lons siand
about $ficthertliere is a God.Without. Snfrcme C.e.rlor.IIan
crnrotbc accused oldislortilg IIis pla. b] ftrkcdrgwith nattrc
lD rdlilio., Buddhisl.\.n t.rches Li,irl lilc nrl corri: irlo
bcirs irL ! \N.n'ry ofNa\s. ol which sci!ai q)rodlriiur is lrrrr
onti r[te, ! s.\dr] rc]rrxhi(ljon hrs no dj\ i..ll srncti(lLed
0.ioritr over ,)lh.r nlodcs o1 pd'.crtron. l,jle .rn th.rcfore nr mxn\ \.rrs iDd. theollsjmll!. cl)Dn)g roL,l(1 rot l)c'
see. rs i fr)Lrlenuln' ln lu)lo8r. Iiir Lhurur.. irr cr)nlust to
oLlrer nrriDstrerlr n'ligrons. llu(L,lhists regrll hlLmrn
ituli\ idrulill rs an iLlL,si!i] .r mirage. cknrirg \tould Llrercl.n
not threirter or dc\rlue L|. |.r$malilr ,), rhrra(ter ol rn

8 BRil0,l P R\ft lt

t,{st M il0 sT!!1
Glt RtstrlRCH


OB I!-\RKERS/ Nso, nost ofthc monothcists r!ho J USl l H l.l llAcl S, NI. AI\l/ OLtr nationil ideoloe)
disagree i{itli the state's policy oD life scicDccs do not offragnraiism has defined our country s approach
dispute it bqond thcir brcthrcD, bei.g rell sc|ooled lo scierce andtechnoLos/. Singapore lias been nised
in thc govcrnmcnt's Dolict to keeD Dublic debate I;ee on a technocratic dream. To us, society's nost
frod an!-discLrssion l]1religir,n. lhis policyto keep dauntins problems can always be solved with ihe
t}e plblic sphe.e deljberatelt neutral my not be the pmctical application of the ght technology and
best nar to engender loDg-tern $cial matu tv but knowledse. The Singapor€an education system s
lire5.Uirlcr rhc hi
it certaiDll Dnkes serse in the short tenn, considcriDg approach to scientific education primarily focuses
the niultjple nxtive aDd rcgional rcligio!s on the good that science can bring rather thaD the
seDsibilities SjDgaDorc has to DreseNe. responsibilities that science must uphold.
,/ri h". o l(jrYed lolmpori
IN Tlllj GRE/\TER GOOD lVE TRUST/ Wc arc taught iD our classroorns that sienever socie,ry
l,llly l, ?001 rcrlr|'rhof
Scoltish novelist J. M. Barrie pnshcs thc tcc|Dological bir.iers a.d elerlbodl
becornes smarter, ]ratpiness. pr osperilr .rnd pr og.ess
commented that "One's religion rs inevitably follolvs. Elhics has never be€tl a part of ifipre(rl[ed.
whatever he is most interested in." our educati.,n ir scierce )et rnothe. outconie of
our decisjoD io keep the public sphere free of xni
Singapore's government and hnit ofrelisi{rus discussion. Wc arc onl) on the
Singaporeans themselves are practical facts, not th. thilosothical diflerences
undeniably most interested in bchindvaning scjentific theories lile er,olLltion and
eationisnr o. Lhe potential ethical diLeDlmas
economic sustainability and fr€senled by adificiil intelligence orthe life scieDces.
progress; if stem cell research and
creating cybrids can help achieve Ir view ofthe increasinglv trcachcrous stakcs out
bcforc ns in tcrnN ofsci.ntific idv.nces, ne i{ould
that, then it cannot be faulted. bc wisc io notdepend on lnaginatism to be tlie sole
arbito of oLrr decisior naking. Lilie it or not,
T]1e starkest differ€nce between the nations where the .luesl io ns .aised bv olhernations aboutwhether
the debateisthe bottesthas to do with the fact that our neu'est techrologies comproniise our humaD
many Western constitutions (USA, UK, GernuD, digrit), nal1h s biodir€.sitr aDd thc saDcti\ of lifc
are founded upon Judeo-Chrisiian tenets or liberal are valid aDd sisrlificaDt for Man's fniDrc. If \re are
democratic values while Sinsapor€'s is not. Simply Dottalking about them at all in Singapore, it oughL
p,r.. b"ca.bp oI ou- L.lieI\. b' dn ro, violal oi to distu r us profoundly. Ultimately, while
of ethics where oihers do. It jsjust not part ofthe pragmatism has been an ideology that has brought
Singapore ideology of pragmatism. We tend to much profit to Singapore's ecoDomy, it should not
prioritise practical solutions lhat help the greate. malrc us too prod to qtrestior why people elsewhere
(econornic) good abore uplioldins concepts like choose ditrerently from !s ard whether it will sene
humaD rights, hunur disDit), aDimal ishts ct al. ou tuture generations better ifwe wer€ to reconsider
Secularism etnrSujshcs ficry zcalous altcrcations our stand. rt
with tire cool ov.r dnrg logic of .conomic surlilal.

29 ER0AOIR ptKpttTW! r/rr r,,i',.. ,(' rpli.,i., is\,.

Ii.]LI[]REllrAl Iil

Scandalous Science
Every once in a uhile, a book cones alo{rg to thro$'mole oil onto the ever burning
debate betwcen Science & Rcligion. Here ar'e our nonl inations for the 6 nrost conho\'ersial

bool<s - in uo particular order - Lo hit our lnocierlr sl]elves By t'Iadia Iuah

enitint Bnq'*


r. |RINCISFUKLI\',\I!A'S uDd e. $'a) Do special supernrnn al irten entio n lvas

OUR POS I HIIM,\li FUI tI R Fr ( 20 o 2 ) requned. HtrmaN are parl ollhisprocess, sharing a
f d \.i l l,. f, i ti c ^ ,1. i,:r." L l,r"s. comnron an.estor ivith tlie great afcs. Brt humans
inlersr.cics h] and oleryrcsc ptior c,1 mood aE ru tL,e tr sals that dei e\ olu Lionary cxplanation
altering druss like Prozac and Ritalh, Prolessol andfoirttoaspiritralDatureasevidenc.db) I'Iar1's
Fukuyama discusscs how biotechnoloay mNt be Lr ohl" !-'Iriel'l da'r".,,JIrn .\1
rcgr ated or stopPcd. Loohngat the delclopDrctlt univetsal scarch for God.
ofcloning, gemr ljre gcDctic eDgineering, stclr ccll
,".. r, ..ra p.,.I. .^l '$.J,r.'.l .n"rFd.:,".
liukuyaDra questions \dheihcr biotechnology lil\DING D,\R$ IN'S GOD (20oo)
violatcs ou humttn ide.tity because oJ ir. Miller, protessor of bnnog)' aL Brown UDiversit),
potential intacton the x:1) $e think andfeel. bcli.les fiDniy in e\,oluiion as \!ell as God. He sees
reconciliatior betwccn rhe story ofhumanity's
lRrtNClS COLLINS' origins as told throuAh cvolution as well as
TII]J I,ANCI]AGE OT GOI) (2()()6) the Rible. To hin, the trul) remarkable thiltg about
llormcr aiheist Dr. Collins rccords ho{ he becamc t., {orrri. h...,F1n..'Br',rl- ",,"1, "_.F
Ch.istiaD aDd whal he learnt tluough his ground the parts llt. thc molecules inleraci' and is hence a
bre.rlinit r.scarch into the hDmaD geDonre. Hp sisl that Cod tashioned :r male al world ni uhich
criticises crcationisD and thc Intelligent tlul,v fiee, truly indepcndc'nt bejngs colld cvolve.
DesiAr ,."...p l lir..,' r'at,,-,"l" l ,
''tundlmentaily tlawed claims" about lhe lvo d will +. DANItrL l)l,lNNETT'S
end up forcing curious and intelligent ChristiaDs nr BRL\]iING SPELL (2o0t))
lrE0UIIHl !'lR TfR
.eject scicnce. effecLjvelt comniittitig intellectllal Like Da\dkins, philosopher D.nDctt's two lnajor
ricide. Hc puts his own theoD, of I heistic rl rr r, . -" r'-..rh rl r rl r r' 'r, -.'JlLr:" i

Evolution (Biol-osos). i'o him, the process oi corect. rnd oeationisDi and its cousir, intellige|t
cvolutioD and nrtur{l selection fornitted the d.sign, are $Tong; and secondly. evolrrionuy
devcl{rpnenl of biolosical diveNily and c..rplexity psycholosy can e\Tlain {'hy religious bclief
over vcn long periods oftim.. Onc€ elolutioD got

t0 Bc0aDrpp.rp,t1r, rJ... . / r,1i.,", .,


rri D,rr,,ri"{ ii", ii, rit . ir rr cti. ,,qirq ti ra.r,rr {,.


The God Particle

HERO / Co re Mav 2oo8, the lons a'vajted L.rye
Hadrcn Collider (LHC) thc$o d's lrrycsr an.t lristrest
tl,. o. wIl.soN
en€rgy pa{icle accele.ator lvili ftrall} be acinated.
nraHng one 78 )ur old Pr.fcssor pctcr Hjggscspecirly
lLapty. With t|e $orld s arom,snrasher iI
scens ro be universal anons Homo SapieDs. ofoalioD, Hjggs can finalll sce jl his ct€gart 1964
r r-r i L "\cieItificanrhsisofretigions, sohrionto one of thc grear pr.)bted$ x;th rhestand.r.d
rol\rnolhd 11. t,...,r'^iF.rul.1,t i. a,-FiE:uL Drodel ofph)sicswas rlght rfto all. I Ie froposed malre.
beliefitseu, b tthe conictior rhat reljgioD is oirlimits |ad rDass, rllowingirio makestarc, planets anitpcopte.
to scient ific iDquiN. He belicv€d the unilerse$,as p€nadcd by an lrvisible
field ofbosoDsthat coDsisted of nuss buttitri. etse.,Ls
5. tr.o. wll-soN's puticles movc th ruugh t|is lield, bosons etrcdirely stict<
THE CREATION (2(,06) to some oftheln, making them Dore massi\e, {,hite
hrlugli th is book. biologist a nd sec lar humaDisI L.o. leaving othcrs to fass utrhindered. phorotrs, tisht
$rilson tries to bridge the gap berween science tarlicles thal halc no nass, .re not affected b!,lhe i
aDd rcligior in the hope of p.eseNing rhe Higgs field at all. T|e Uste ous bosoD poshrlated by
biodiversity of tr{rth A fome. Brpiisl. Witson Higgs has becomc sr,Iuldanrentat to fhJ,sics thal it is
chose Lhis iillc becansc ne lolei{ t woutd rosonrtc si rh ofter nicknancd the "cod particlc". ObsennnB jt Niil
clangeiical Christians a srouD thrt he believcd $as allolr physicisrs the s'o d over to ffia v lill jn the
so vast and influenlial rhrl without its support, nissing liDks'in the StandardXfodel ofph),sics, exttain
inrportant illobrl goals could not be rcached. Ires€nted holother clenr€ntaI] padiclcs acquire propeLlies such
irnovati!€ly as. lerter sernonising to a licrional as Dass and enabtc lnore understandilg ofth. secret
Sotrthem lirptist niDistcr., WilsoD drails atrerrjon to nrechanisms of clecfuc,Dagn etisn and ilravitatiorr. (,
thc De€d forboth belic\€rs and non belicvers to worti
together iftlel genuile\ carc about crcarion

No stranger toruiting bools learnrg dowl religioo (tjkc
his carlier flte Blind Wot&tnakct), contr.oversial The LHC itself
erllutionist Richard Da$(ins, a protessorofrhe pubtic \rILlr\IN / U or-tunately, Dot everyrne $elcoDres rhe
UDde.standing ofSci.nce at oxford, oDce agani fikens LHC. Thoxgh fnnd€d andbxilr b\, thc 2,ooo scientists
rcligious thith to a discase and as his goal irll-re,, b ar,rb5,r',\pFit . Jn, tj nnr-torie,,n
convincing his rcaders thar atheisnr is r '.braye,, 35 countrjes, naysayers hive ir.€n raDtinil .rbo t
aspiratior. tlo$'cver. as fc'llow scieDtisr O$€D cingedch apocalvptic "\4ra I if
sccnados, mosth ceDt nBaround
poirlts oxt, in sinultaneouslr defendi.g evolurionaDd the accidental creatioD of nrassirc Ea.rti{tevoLrrinsbtack
insistiDg upon alheism in rhis booli_ Dr. Ild\!kjns iiolcs. strangelets aDd antimate.. .'Conce.Ded U.S.
frobabl) sirsle hrDdedlr nakes nnrrc converts io citizen'Walte. Wagner has alreadl fiied a laa.sDir nr
irltciligent d.slit! than anr oftle teadirg intetiigenr Hawaii against CERN and lhe U_S. DepartDre t of
Eneryv iD .r bid to stop the LItC fi.on being slvitched
on bcfore i tull saietvaDalysis iias been caded out.It
Jl Bl0{Dl t Dl
RSTn.V.5 tt ,..4r. ^.1..t ..i ...

F amous Illustrations in Science

You night have encotntered stranlie refercnces to Pascnl's wagcl or ockham's Razor when )'ou
reail discussiols on science and cthics. Erer wondered what they wele about? By Nadja Nlah

American rhilosoph er ,Iohn Searle
$'anted to prove thal fot all their
symbol processinit to$'e.,
computers could never attain an
indeFndent rnind akin to a hornan
beinit. Hc imagi ed a conputer thai
coukl takc Cliinese characters as
iDtNt and produce olh.r Clirese
chancters as output so conviDcingLy
that it could coDliDce a Datite
C|nrcsc spealier that the conrputer
was actual), r rcal chnlese-spenknrg
human. Artificial IDtelliSencc
advocates \rould hypotlrcsise that
ihe colnputcr could undcrstand
Chinese as a ])c$on dc,es.

Ilowevcr, searle argued otheNisc

usnlg lhis sccorld scenaio. ,\ pu.el)
Erglish spcakercould bc in r roo'n
where he rcccive.t instNctn'rs n) PASTAL'S WAGER
ChiDese characteN and slill manage I the 2oo7 TIM F. magazine de.bate rbou l Science vs Rcligion between

Lo rnaDipllate somc srrnbols h order Dr lrancis collins an.l Richard Dre4(ins, Collins conchded his
to ouqut approPriate Chincsc aryutnents uitli Pascalt \{ag€.. Frcnch phjlosolher ud nrathcnutician
.esponscs to an audience outside as Blaise\ rLlnrnntioDs on ccftainty ledhimto concl ethat reasoD\!as
loDg as he folo$ed instNctions lrom untrustworlIr'- and God Nas infi nitely incompreheDsible. tlence, faith
abooli that a rcal bilingual speaker in coil cane do$n esserrlialllto t ganblc for $€ {er. cq allvun.crtail
had leli for hnn lhe au.lience about $'hether God eisted or di.t Dot exist Based on his Pionee rg
judging by t|e output a s\crsalone ivorli oD probability theo{ aDd the conccpt irf infiniiv, Pascalt
would rot see th{t
be able to conclLrsion wrs that ihis was a gamble was forced to take
the English speaker knei{ nolhnrg bv delauli and sincc tlie potcntial gain rvrc infiniie life
abouL Chincse. fhLrs, snniiarl)', it wouid be unwise according to probability
computers were only as theory to bet against the existence of God and
intelligent as their potentially lose everything.
instructions and
programming and God exi5ls re) God d6e.notexistl-G)
Living rs ll God e{isls
far from having their Livinq ..

it God does ndl.ri3l (-e) ll

own mind.

J, 800rDr0ofc\Dltllvl- u ,tr't,. ^ t..t \ t

Atenn ntade popularbl novels like
,^ldoDs tluxlcy's Arore
Neu l,yorld
rnd Thomas B,nchon s CrauiiU'.s
Rntr 6ou, Pavlov's dog" is
conlmonl), u nderstood as a pcNon
SCHRODINGER'S CAT who mcrel! reacts to a situarion
CarLoons like flellsitg, t.iihaaDro iDstead ot tiiiDking rationallv.
and Yr.GLOh I .efer.nced it. So did Rrssian thysician.nd p*rhologjst
popular Arnerjcan drarra,ryr,re lvaD Pirvlov obserled thar dirgs
ru.r. Thoriilh this nrysteioxs cat could be coDditio ed iDto certain
Las appeare.l ir pop cult c .rany rcfl,r\ responses hkc salivrtins
timcs, it is trull .nind-bos'rijDc. through a scies of.liffcrcnr stinlrli.

ODe ol th. rnost puzzling things Although t|e dog initialll saliv.ted
Axstrjan ph!sicisi jtri{iD onlvxit]r tbod prcserLed before jt,
Sch.6diDg€r found iD the it subconsciously began ro sali!ate
Copenhager int pretrtion oI as i!.ll ivhen ithcard abell r|ar had
quantum rnechaDics i!as the co.celt prclioust). becD souD(led \rhenerer
of suferposition: r state Ulat thcre lras preseDtrtior of food.
conbined all thc p.rssiblc l)osirioDs O(KHAM'5 RAZOR Sometiow, nr.egardless ol wheth$
(or 0t(Al'4'5 RA70R)
ofa $brtomic luJticle. Sc|tding.r tbod was in ffont ofit, as loDg as ir
r{ th ceDtury ljnglish philosophcr aod
ill slrited dre oddncss of thar |eard the ircll souDd the dog would
niar William of oclham dcvised a
assu nrptiim by irmginiDg a scena o salivatc a u tomatically. Xlosr
$'ie.e r catras put sinipl. device of logical thinting that
nr a sealedbox popularl)' kDoi{n as Pavlovian
lvherc the cafs lifc deperlde.t on Lhe has bccorne r Nle oftlinnb iD thc
coDditionhg, his theorjcs on how
state 01 a srbatoniic parlicle. crcation of scientific rheorics.
Li thc CopeDhagen interymlaLjon His analrsis was that in rrving to people could be
of q rnlum mc.banics, . s)steni crp)anr anyp|eaomcnon, ne sho d
rnake as fenassumptions as possjble.
conditioned i nto
stotx beilg r supe.uosition ol srates
As Iong as we hid multiple certain behaviours with
and becones cithe. onc or lheothcr
$'hen aD observ:rtioD rrl(€s placc. conpeting theorics that \rerc €qual the right stimuli led to
This irnpljes thrt rile Llie box is
in othcr respects, the nrcst loSical
choicc lvoukl bc to selectthe Lheon
the foundation of
closed, t|e erists in a
supertositioD of b.rLh siatcs of that rcq u ired thc feuest as$nrtptioDs modern psychology
''decaycd .uclelrs/dead cat and aDd fostulatcd the fewcst entiti.s. and the philosophy of
''uDdcca!ed Ducleus/ljviDs cft '. octham's Rnzor is usuatly
the mind.
WhcD the box open and aD
obscNntion is made, the $,avc
^ "All other
things being equal, the
fnnction collapses into ole ofthe
simplest solution is the
To put it simply, t]1e cat
remains paradoxically
both alive and dead
until the box is opened.

33 ER0lDtR PtRSPtfilVts ri. s.i.n.? & r clioun iss,r




r E4
lq o
t'l .l 5sgBE6 I

gd EE i ^ I
I F ? nt;*:i
l*r\ I 'Et$a+3
48-f A:3

I 1&3eFg
i='tTh-.I 15

*gi. riFgg'i[H 9E

! =
+- =
II srE+gs
: qE c6EEeq
= ;;E:C4
E 1d":;:

i-;E =

E rSfi**i
= ^
i=;*u lige
r,F.k' .
/ a '..,:
+ =
:s tPfiri' i2i!
r +4! _ ).'
:r, \-
'\ats :

*iq i,

*eor I ,,;;!o'{

!4. _
el iE-ib€
EF= E-,E
:- 5
ii=E /'>u-''. ,'
rE (n--

a =i ' e

;j 'F'
EF \-''3
,,'; '
o (.
a :


; g E cr:E
J 1= :fii15" F>
E T ! *
:5 R
D$geIFEEH :r-
= ,
- El*H€=
;f ii:=
;E- Y:
o X

iiiiiiiiiiii iiiililiiiiiiiiiiiiililiiiiii
rrr I tl tl l{lJl rlll rl il lt lr L i I ltr ll ll il ll =E
ltlr l! lll,l lll ll