440 BOOK REVIEWS

sighted, and more democratic than any so far in use. In short, we can transcend tech-
n ocracy .”
“This. then is the ultimate objective of social futurism, not merely the transcendence of
technocracy and the substitution of a more humane, farsighted, democratic planning, but
the subjection of process of evolution itself to conscious human guidance. For this is the
supreme instant, the turning point in history at which man either vanquishes the process
of change or vanishes, at which, from being the unconscious puppet of evolution he be-
comes either its victim or its master.”
This book should be available in the libraries for high school and college youth.
N. E. BINGHAM

POTTER, VAN RENSSELAER. Bioethics: Bridge to the Future. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.

Prentice-Hall, 197 1 ( 196 pages).
Van Rensselaer Potter’s Bioethics: Bridge t o the Future, is a new science which pro-
vides an exciting and reasonable approach t o the concern and confusion about our en-
vironment. It combines the work of the humanist and scientist. It portrays the way for
man t o control his cultural evolution toward the goal of survival. It defines wisdom as the
use of knowledge for the social good, both now and in the future, for the survival of man
can no longer be taken for granted. Such wisdom permits the testing of ethical values
based upon biological facts in terms of the future. Actions which decrease the chances for
human survival are considered immoral and must be judged in terms of available knowl-
edge and an ongoing monitoring of survival parameters that are selected both by scientists
and humanists.
Potter identifies three concepts of progress that are chronologically related t o one
another. Namely, the religious concept, the materialistic concept, and the scientific-
philosophic concept. Individuals tend to move from the religious to the materialistic, to
the scientific-philosophic concept.
In discussing evolution, he asks the question “Why does natural selection so often
lead to the extinction of a species rather than to its perfection?” He points out that
natural selection stresses short time gains on a generation t o generation basis that cannot
anticipate changes in the environment, yet the environment is constantly changing. The
survival of a species is dependent upon characteristics that permit survival in a changing
environment. Such evolutionary development not only fits individuals to live in their
present environments, but also produces descendants that will fit future environments.
He defines the optimal environment as follows: (1) basic needs can be satisfied by
effort, (2) i t exhibits a respect for sound ecological principles with a long range point of
view, (3) it is free from toxic chemicals, unnecessary trauma, and preventable disease,
(4) it permits adaptive responses in each individual, continually from birth t o death as a
result of systematic changes by physical and mental tasks which come at appropriate
times and within individual capabilities which increase rapidly at certain times and de-
cline later, (5) it provides individual happiness that involves oscillation between satis-
faction and dissatisfaction with a sense of identity, despite a continual revision of on-
going intentions, ( 6 ) it requires productivity that directly or indirectly involves commit-
ment to other members of society, and (7) in it there is a continual search for beauty and
order that does not deny the role of individuality and disorder.
Potter points out that the great dilemma in modem society is how to harness the
talents of the specialist and yet utilize his talents t o promote the survival and improve-
 BOOK REVIEWS 441

ment of mankind. There are certain problems that outweigh all others when we think
about science and the future of man. These can be categorized as population, peace, pol-
lution, poverty, politics, and progress. Consideration of the first five of these may be a
matter of survival, and survival is necessary for progress. Up to now we have focused on
progress and paid very little attention t o the first five problems. In discussing biology in
the future, he states that the great medical advances come in terms of measures applied
to populations rather than individuals, and that available knowledge of this type is not
being applied to large segments of the population, either abroad or within this country.
The world population is already out of control and t o apply such knowledge to large seg-
ments of the population only worsens the future prospects of man. Before we begin to
think about the improvement in the quality of life, we have to attain a world consensus
that faces up to the necessity for zero population growth and an abandonment of the
goal in which Americans hold the rate of material and energy consumption as their ideal.
First, we should agree on survival as a goal, leading to population control, leading to an
improvement in the standard of living, rather than striving for an improvement in the
standard of living and then expecting the control of the population to occur auto-
matically.
We have the means to monitor and chart the important survival parameters with the
help of modern computers and data banks and to pick up danger signals long before the
man in the street is aware of them. One of the things that is not a survival parameter is the
GNP, or gross national product, which is highly misleading because it is the gross product.
We need tosub-divide the GNP intocomponents that promote survival, those that are pos-
sibly neutral and those that decrease the chances of survival. The survival of world civili-
zation will be impossible unless there is some agreement on a common value system,
especially on the concept of an obligation to the future generations of man. I f the nations
of the world are to find a bridge t o the future, they will have to realize that they must
unite to preserve the fragile web of nonhuman life that sustains human society. From this
moment on, we are fighting a desperate war for survival, and we cannot indulge in up-
holding value systems that may n o longer be relevant. Potter concludes with a bioethical
creed for individuals.
In these days when we’re searching for ways to make the curriculum relevant, to make
science meet man’s long time needs, I find this proposal of Potter’s, a specialist in the
biochemistry of cancer, but one who envisions clearly the implications of science to the
future of mankind, as the most helpful book I have read. It should be available to high
school and college youth.
N. E. BINGHAM