THE

SCIENCE &
RELIGION
ISSUE

BROADERPERSPECTIVES
CURRENT AFFAIRS MADE SIMPLE

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

I "R\-:".r
THE
SCIENCE &
RELIGION
ISSUE
BROTDER PTR3PEOIVE' IS PUEUSIIED BY SCHOOTOTIHOUGHT
420 Norlh Bridge Rood #0617, Norlh Eridge (enlre,
Singopore 188/2/, www.sthoolollhought.tom.sg
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

IIII EROADER PENSPTCTIVES IEATT

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
emoil: mirhoel-rhunq@righteous.rom.sg
 ffiffi
5 THINOS TO (NOW

5 WAYS SIIINTISTS
PIR(EIVI RII.IGION
'l he nr cm s.ienrifi. .ofrnrnin
h.rs more th.rn one \'4.of dealins rdth
thc hoal] old chcstnut of ltcligion.

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

ON 2ND THOUGHT

RETHINK MAN

0 Omripotcnt.O riscicrt.
Is llankind rcalll as grcat

TSSAY MA|{EOVIR
as hc thillk?
30W#
IUI-IUR[WAT(H
IHI MATRO MAl(IOVTR SIANDATOUS SIIENII

4 Airu dcnlonstr.rtion oihow aryuncnts

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

A MATTIR OF OPINION

THI HINDU UNESTO BURIAUIRAI

vs.IHt Nt0 LUDDITE
()rrrM item s.rr.rc off on the issrre ofufi eiher
scierce needito he nore resnhle.l in the
lisht 0frercnt ad\ances. ''
REBOOIYOUR MIND

T()IAL V5. GLOBAT IAMOUS ILTUSIRAIIONS

ONWARD SINGAPORE! rN s0tN(t
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.
 5 I|.|INGS TO l{NOW

Five Ways
Scientists
Perceive
Religion
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

ABOUTTllIWR]IIR

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

 YOUIUEITh 5

1 2 BBt HARDTIt(:DAWKINS
THE FI]N I)AIlI I,]N'I'AI,IST TIItrIST: THE STAUNCH I)F:IiI'NI)T'R OI' Ii]\ITH:
RICIIARI) I) 'IVI<INS ZA(;III,oTJI, IiT,-NA(i(}AR
!=Pm4HbqUKmYo

lloi rh 5 ho'd drlliry SBt

inie iAr $ 1lr R drrd

DR IL NIOEAR IXPIAINS
lt|t ( fl{Ttfrc PIr0sr0N
0 litK0Ml{

DARIVIN'S ROTTI4.EILERS/ Playirg up to the
age-old stcrco!,!c of scienl ist as icoroclastic heretic,
ourrnost si den l athejsl scientists are nakiDg a Dane
(and atbrtune) turthenseh€stodayas Danrint rnost
yicious Rottweilers. No faith is sfared from the
bellige.ent bald or acidic liite ofscience s selfstyled
Ol,l lrrr'.r,"ir r.,'l,.ts rlwl'^lp-ip\e r in'rhirg
rcnotclysul)cnahfa] are deenred as insane as those
who b€lieve in fairies, flying teapots and other
absurdisms. Richard DawkiDs. writer ofthc bcst
selling ?}e cod reft6mn, is by far onc ofthe rnost
hrr.l
'm'
rLl.lpr '!ni' Lq.'tl , C^ r'ir F^t,nl.dtion
byscieDce aDd scicnce alon€, $ith Dan'in's'fheory'
, It.nlu,. r Ja rd SiIti .Fo' t\4uouto ijrn-.i.
To Dalvkins, at|eisnr islle o,rll logicaloutcone ard
indication ofahealthr, jndependert mi!d. His critics
lrom both religious and scientific circlcs grcuse t|ai
such o\€rt hostilig to thc $orld s fait|in unde.mioes
ary effort to csiablish dialogue on science. In the
dcbate o\cr crcationisnr fornrstance, atheisls are far
morc dogmatict|an believe.s because unlilie :rtheisn,
on.'s religioLrs idenlity does not hinge on one's stand
on evolu tion, lerviDg room for dirloguc.
O'f IIIR SCItrNTISTS IN THIS C-q.TEGORY/
,^neican ph,\sicist Richard Fcynnan; Finnish
inveDtor of thc LiDux kmncl. ]iDus l o.valds ( t
vnr|ldlEqSsAU&leoi!ru
TIIE WORLD ACCORLIINC IO COD/Not
iniimidaicd bv t|e polenrics ol sLauncli atlieists, Dr li oq$!r explore5
scientists ol lhe Abrahamic faitlis - J .taisx,.
Christianit) and lslam ' li:rve thrcM thcir gauntlcts
into the ftry as well. Thcir confidcncc (c tics sa),
a ogaDce) comes frcm thcir unwalerins belie I Lhal
hr]rlr s i" ,..8 v". tn^\lpdse oI I'e a, r, rr isi ,n
providcs rncanins. Esluian celebritt Beologist rrd W,lft IHIs
sorld dpelt oD biostraliiication Zagliloul El-Naggar
rlsc-Oytli nagazine in 2oo7 as a kcy
was cited by
etanple ofrn Islanic tundancntalist scicntist lrho
viewed the uDilerse entirclythroug| thelens (]1 (he
Ko.aD. El-Naggar belieles iD the scientific method
but also uDapologctic.llv believes Lhat nrtural
disastcN arc aD indicntion olCod s wnth oD Mdlkin.l
Scientists like El Naggar horveve. sliould not bc
associated with the Aneican political morcrncntof
CrentioDism ed its cousin, Intclligent D€sjgn, lvhich
.,rl lorlan.r ,.i.. il.J,d'i prdlin a,lral"r'on
r0NrAo(r99/)
ofscripiures that conclude t|at Cod crcated lhe wc,rld
in sia days and drat Earth is 6,c)C)0 ]ears okl.
Unsurtf isinglv, the Anr€ricnn creationist n.,venent
has beconre the {avourite target of tlie athcist
scientists, who nock itas pseudoscicncc.
OI'IItrR SCIENTISTS IN THIS CA'I'I,]GORY/
EgptiaD cheDrist Wahccd Badarv_1, 4t

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

 .) 4
THE BR]DGtr-BUILDING DtrLIE\'ER: THB SOUl,'SLqRCFIINC AGNOSTIC:
DR. tRAllClS t0tlllls 0l{ FRANCTS COLLINS CARL SAGAN
]iiI IAl{GUAGT OfGOD

ihtulioi beLlek vilh hn

l$ld resulo.ly or 8e{e ey

Unive6iry, Co ilornio.

GOD IS lN fHE DETAILS/ Unlike the siaunch \|/HO'S OUT TllERll?/ Not comtortable wiili the
GOD,THTUNIWRSI
defeDders offaiih, rhe bidge building believer makes someiimes belligerent corne. that athcists paint
AIID $TRNHINC
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
th.tt 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
SURfTl1I!
understanding the natural world but is Powerless to rather than a God sith pelsonhood and motivatiotls
STIPHIN liAl1/I{IllC,
answer queslions on neaning and Pu.pose ofthc The late paleontolosist Stephcn Jay Goltld arsued
Tl]T BIG EAllG A|lD GOO
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
'!ith
bishons.hlml
of such a scieDtist lnown for his $ork on tle Hunan Franc.is Collins who belicve science and faitli are
LFlornr P ojF.r. Fenr 'leborF wir\ tu"hdd Daqt in. intertwjned. The late cosmolosist Carl Sagan believed
iD TIME magazine and recently released book, that a ratioDal, Don'relisious vie$'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.
hlmseLf ofd slophen OTHER SCIENTISTS IN 'THIS CATI]CORY/ OTI{ER SCIENTISfS IN THIS CATEGORY/
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

l'*".-'*i.*l
04 BloADlR DtRSlttTlVts tht "ip t.pt trliri.,t i..uP
 5
'I'II Ii SI'IRJ'I'U,\L SCIEN1 IST:
I:IU T'JoF C,\PIL,\

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'
'r
l' ol Past.frrji.is.r. 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|c.nr 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 ,-
^s
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. $.{s psrudoscicncc andproicstc(l
for "instilulionrlised religio! !arliculrr\' thr agairNt the notion ofrn jnt.lligcDt Crcator. Hc argncd
Abrrhr.ric Iajlhs. lhe! preler to crll theDlselvcs tliat f!ith-bascd rssu!rftions Ucrc .li.nlous rs lher
''sfirll!!l or ere. pa.adoiicrlh spi tual {theist' could Dot bc rcfutcd logicrllv: tlt Oe.1or (ould be
r,.1." aDlthjDg nnrginabl. {ere. somelLi,rs as.idicuLous rs
l.lasle r or New \e religioDs thrt rrc Dot focuscd on int.lligenl pislu) ns Lo.g as he chime.L to be its
llie concept ofr personrl (l(trIor thc Dc.id to tblloN ''tJro!het"!ossessirigrsetof iuc'futablc holr'books.
cet1ain noml!recpts. Thc most frnrons cxanrtlc ol J leude$on elen \!ent as fr a-q to crcatc his o$r
tarod!
mcli r scientist is,\mericNn fh!sicist FritiolC.fr. ''gosjrel' depictiig a hcr\cn fillcd \it| stilD.rs rnd
1.,.\r..r fl /-. trt.!-\..,rr',9..r,i,t .. ,old htsc s \!.ll .s l,is ilr.rn,rir. r. rl,p |pr
aDd netaphlsics ilonld cv.ntLrau lc.d t., th. srlnr
CoDnnandmcnts thc Eight l.l t.lhd You l)id. ls.
knowle.Lgc. ,\noth.r rcc.Dt conhovcrsiil scienlisl ol'
this cat.gon isSan Hards$'|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 Hrr.is 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 pra.tn. 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(
r
^
rHtR scm\t tsl s I\ 1 t IIS c |t Ir,GORl,l
() ID\isit,le Pink UtricoDi crcatcd bv thc lltcrD.t
N.nr.s.icn.. a..de 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

 fttaltDl,!tt5
Y0UNGsOUl
0nhi5M vr. Pf SS|[llsl,i

PAST s. tUTURt

HISTORY

Yl]UTUBfIll]I

POIl{]NGHORNION

s0FNtt&Rt ct0tl

WCZE A

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$'er beyond our three lives of rnaierialistic aDCt scxDal excess behnid a
dirnensional matrices oftime. space aDd maiter. Belbre saf.on fagadei Catholic priests wlio wantonl)
sercDelr-
the reality of cloDing and inter-spccies genetic ignorc their vows ofcclibacy and chastity to grope IX(IRPT5 IROM R IHARD
DAW( IIS'11]I GOD DTLUS]ON
enilineering caused us to dissect our collective I, i-to In , ,. rBA cl r.t dn r.'n;,l. .sh^.1 inr
conscience to qucstion lhe ever bluring line betweeD salvaLion b1 cod's smce but prcach hell and bdmstone
3klz|lXPs&leolure*lohd
progress aDd regrcss. Beforc Religion got sophisticatcd on hornose\uals and liberals. The reality and honor
€Doughtonunageitspublicimageanddebu*point of reiisious hwocrisy is plain enough for anyone to
brDoint iD systematic - cven scientific - fashion all
thc \rays she had bccn so nisuDdersrood b) us
Torp-n.. B, .urp S.t pmL4r j .nF \. Jr t., nd1 : on bool{shelves liavc been assailed too by a recenr
cdsis and the shc$ 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.
sea.ch 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
"intes
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 bi.th 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 p.ogr.ss 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

FEATURI ARTI(Lt
After all, logically spcakins l]s DasdinJ
hypothcsis goes ihe smarte. and more
, dvi n.ed maDLiDd becomcs. and the morc
nass Nedia awakens us to thehpoc.isies
ofreligir,us delotees, the natural outcorne
$'ill be to enbracc scierce and/or atlieisni.
Cudously, the nurnbers of conle'ts to
ntheism in the ilo d has not dramatically
risen with the changjng times. hstead. it is
.eLigion nost p.omin.ntly the eler
present Abrahanic.eLiitions of Judaisnr.
ChristianiLy and Islam as well as thc al$'ays
ftshbnable Eastctr .eligions that lus
gro$r by eDviable lcaps and bounds
togethcr xitli liodemisation.
In 1916, rescarclie.James I€uba found only
4(l% of scientists believed in God. DevoutL)
athcist, he predictcd too that atheisrn $ould
spread as educationbccame more accessible
alld socicrr- more sofhisticated. tsul aftcr a
century of great change, in 1997, histodans
Larson and Witham replicate.i Leuba s
survey only to discover lhat thc depth ol'
rcligious hith arnoDg scientisis had not
budscd - 40% ofscieniists still agreed that
God aDd an afterlife exists- Moreov€r, the
research fouDd that mathematicians w€re
nost inclined to believe in God while
biologists, physicisrs and astronomers
tended to have the lighest rate of disbeliet
This findins .eveals that orthodo\ relisiotl
is no rnore disappcaring among tlie
iDtellectual elite thar it is amoDgthepublic
One ar.esting rcasoD for why atheisn his
not caught the nnagination ofnrorc People
scientjsts or otleNrisc - $'as oneredby a
2oo7 I4rIRltI) niagazinc articLe bt.' GaN
Woll. Evcn to aD ngnostic like Wolf, it is
difficult for atheists lo sell their ideas as
lols as Lhe.y sound so openly con.tescendins
of the 90% of thc rvorkl Lhat bclieves jn
wolf
religioD in some form or other.
concludcs that "exlremisn in oppositionto
exlremism is too uch'. Sadly, sornc of
science\ mostprominentatheists arejust
as oppressilc, self-righleous ard rcpulsively
dogrnatic as rel igion's $'orst
lundanentalists. Even scientists $'ho
nttellectu \ side wiih the lie\rs of ath.isn!
uncomfortable with i|c toDe ofnoral and
intellectual righieousDcss, are quick to
divorce thcmselves |rom the likes of
08
Dawkins and IIa is. pleading lor a
'nore
conciliatorydebate. 1o \Voll atheist scieDcc
is a lost cause politically and culturally
because it carcs less rboutfixingtheworld s
prcblenis and more .ibotrl being right rbout
thcir pafi icular doctrine of sciencc.
Clearlt many modem scientists see
no contradiction between a quest
to understand nature and
supernature. TheY accePt the
possibility of a deity that exists
outside of our testable reality of
space, trme and matter - essentially
beyond science's ability to fully
assess. To them, truth can come to
light thrcugh both scientific enquiry
and divine revelation. Thc Diaiest),
elcgance and jntdcacyofthe outersPace of
rhc universe and nrner space of hrunrn
benrgs is testimony eDough that everything
has bccn inteLLigentlt' created by some
Suprene force rather t|an thro$'n iogethcr
by pure chance. lor instaDce. il the
gravitational constant were off br-' oDe part
in i hnndre.lmillion million. thc univeme
could not hrre evanded after the Big B{ng
in a i{ay th{t would allow life to octur. E!€n
the prescDce ofa sophisiicated concept of
j ,ri,-",
| ,ltn?r3llr (rtn,r/ /'t.nr/r drr,,ltti
I d,fi.rt,lld!,/!srn'hirr.r./rn!,r'1,r.
BCOrDlq
Dt\0trTtF t] .. i, .t. .\ t 1t.1.
conscience and lnoraliiy tlithin humaD
beinits is sceD as a plausible sisDpost ofa
divire \a,ill driving the c|eation process.
THl], RI.]CENT PtrACE PROCtrSS/
I'lodcrn science has scttled into a knrd of
d€tentc i{ith its formcr eDeny becausc
rnoderaics on both sidcs have laid doi{D
their arms and began a peace process
Although rhc Cathoiic Church has been
rcundly criticised fo. its forbiddhs ol
coniraceptive use aDd its adamaDt stand
againsisten ceLl rcsearch,someof itsmost
powe Lll scientific cdtics who o e. both
praclical sohtions and intcllectual deb.ie
are fc,und withnl the Church itselt ln 1992
and 2ooo, t|e late PopeJohn Paul II issued
a fom l apolos, for all th€ histoical errors
of thc Church inc.lndiDs the Calileo atrair.
ljnionologist lldward O. Wilson's
'the Credtion: An Appeal ta Sate Lilb ot1
&rrrr appcals to believeN ard Dotl-beiie'e'5
to unite lbrthe sake oltheplanet. Though
a sceptic ol religion, he argucs that b€liel
iD God is a product ofevoluLion and thus,
should not be re.jccted o. dismissed,
bul further inresLigatcd by sciencc to
better understaDd lhcir significnnce to
Therehas been a well-pu bliciscd su.se toc)
jn thc nunber of "cvaDgelist scicntists'
like Dr. Francis ColliDs ard Dr. Zashloul
Ll Naggar who have won the rcspecl of both
their scientific and .elisious cortenporaries
because of thejr intelleciual ardscridural
thei beliefs
iDtegrity. Reconciliation of
comes from their position on the
interpretation of r€ligious torts: not every
passase should be taken literally especialy
\rhen ihe saiptures arc in the fonn of poeby
or songs rather than instructioD or history '
In or her words. what were memt to be read
as meiaphols aDd synbols should not be
read as absolute fact. lhev are quick b point
out discrepancies iD tlie belicfs of
lLrndamentalists on both sides. l]ven hard-
nosed atheist Richard Dawkins lras
grudgingly admilted to respecliI)S thc
sciertilic kno$'ledge (if not the religious
hclinarjc,ns) of esteemed British prrticle
physicist xnd ChrisiiaD fieologian Rocrend
Dr. JohD PolkinshoDe.
.t, i . t.
xl!ch lilie laliled !rodigalsoD. Scicncr
Ll)e
hrs been irreiistil)lr drr$.n ha!]i n) its old
homr rnd hcarth. Fcw of t.dar's Iouths
rajscd on dclibcratcly in.ligious nrodeD
edLrcation slsterns i.e arva.e ol tle histot
ol sc;erce lhat clearl) sho$, ho$. Reliiiiorl
fathered Science. Thc,\brrhrnic lriths
Jtrdaism, Chrislirnitt and Ishlr rll
r.llocat. thr sccknrg oflno$lcdgc rnd tb.
.x.min.tion ol rilrtr. fir.lL,.s o1 . di\ i.e
Cr.rlor. lh.\ b.Li€\e lhrl Cod (nf lre
horourel lh.ough the respectful and
rjgourous ust of thc mird or tof of tIc
hcrri.Dd stirit. Ifunr ClrristiNns ind
Crtholics llid do\!n k.Itl..ri.s.l nr.dc l
thvsi{'s,..|.nristr', nr.dl.inc, rni Lrerralic!
rrl ge.elics: Gies,)r Aje,r!lel. Rene
Deicades, Ilirluel l:aradur. Bhisc 1'ascrl.
Robtrt Bovl., Louis hsi.!r.II!\ lhDrk.
Ihvrs rlsoth... lNInsli.r ibi.k.rs $h.
grrLr tlr. hr,rld rh..onrtJi ol /ero. lhe
srslenr olrlg.b,r, lIe rtodeu i,ui,rberiuil
\stelr arnl hid llle guNnl\rork for nodcrn
Dlediclie as $.ell {s rhoristf . J st a l.xrli
at mrthcDiaticxl and s.i.rntifr. lcxi.o.
Nr.ls llris l..l: rlg. 1h.r, rlgebri. !Ll,tli.
.L.h.ni\ rlL b..rr llie p.ell\ ol rl slort
1o.,r lor tlie Aulric 1!orl ,\lhh lcod).
S llrrising]l. rtircirD s trvoxlit. oid
cvcD
intcll(lurl malrlTs Cj.lil.o Crlil.i rn.l
(lhr es lh vi. re\ e, \ei,t rLS lir$ Lo douln
the erisleDCe oi cod. calileo reDrrnrcd r
devout Crlholic dt-.titt bting unfxirlv
hbellcd bl thc crtholic Inquisrti r rs r
|cr.tic fd tushingIr hll)ot|.sis r]rri r|.
slLn \!.s rhc.cnrr. oi lh. solar s!!Leirr rfd
r'ol llanh as ltre Catl,oli( Cli!r(h lrelie!ed.
DrNin hnristlfilas coDriDccd tliat (l(trll$
thr Firn Cmsc of thc uDnarsc His ll !i!ri
from Ch]istirDil, to!!rds rgnosti.isnr i!.s
n.t |Nrus. of Iis dis.or.ries .borL
!\'.Irtion brLl b..,ius. hF (o!l!1 irol coi!e t!
le rs $ilh the deall olhis daughter]\lnie.
]t ${s ! crisi-\ of frith iD thr bcncvolcncc of
God utlrcr thrn thc.\istc..c ol Cod.
s()ltlt'r'NlElzscHt., (;( )l' ts (NO t)
l)l,rAl)/ So {h\ else does G!d renrin
delirrnlr rlne ur iD aije ofscience:r lt hrDs
out thc otrlt gods thrt lrr{l .licd el.Dg tlrc
wi] to nrxldrlisrtion ivo. Z.ns. Rr. (ldin
r.d SIn \\rL Korg: l)iL.LIeorrs o1 g!ds
s1..r irs liof' liLlrell{1.)!b b!sed !oi or
lhe riso! r s(trL! rrl do(unetrtation rnd
o1
exrnLituti!n l t on the lugaics ol orllh
09
frsscddoiu tr$titi..s.nd natn. lor..
Th. tuit]rs th.t br!. .n.ld|cd .lkl so t)i,JlLl
b..rLisi, llieir loLkN\€a irrlLidriousL\ mrde
sui e llielr s(ri!lu.es surrired the iourne\
oJ tine, iDtelledurl !fhc{\'al rnd soc!)
political chaDgc: th. Buddhist Trifitrk^.
tlrc H|rdn Vcdrs, tlr. J.wish l i.rltll. lh.
Ciristirn Bibl. rnd rhe Ish i{ Kortir
|..f1. l,)\e,l their relisi.)rs !asiionrtelv
eroustr to pksen e thern rl all costs. Tod.Ll,
Lhe io ner Soviet strtes ste {florL Shnrgof
rclignm !nd !n a])rDdoDnrcnt olrt|.isnl
r stit. of!.rN ol bknd\ elb,1 Lo,e0r.rss
l)eslite lhe cullLrrrli{rN Lreingfought otr
theierchilg of.rcrtidrism rDd iDtclluturl
dcsigDin.\!rc .an nhools. Drsr lnard. in
dr cnd \..1 lo.c( !r)\ 1le frlddle qn,rd,
desirlng Liollr {ien(e rnl religlD m their
ll\es. Iew $rtrt to bc tiihrr Lxdditc or
atheist for r good rcailr. E cnnodllo!.s
thc conlcDi.ncc of t..I.olog!. Bn1
sirnult.n.onslL in!oD. \'ho hiLs xrertlrd
\ ilh r ., rsliirg corirful€r or o urkv toasler
oren lnLows this simtle truth: tlic liagilit!
a!d iDefficicDct of hum!n nradc
tcdnDlogics and slstons do Dot i.s|ir.
lbsolut. contidcn.c. \\ir oblioL,sl\ ]1r\.
lrorLbl. r!1,i.g relrll!el\ slrrule
l.cltr!toSi(,s Norli, rDd clen nrore tr)ublc
$ith DraDrging $'hcrc our ngli.st hnmrD
imfuls.s Nrnt to t.kc us. ADd tl. nror.
scicn..r fus]r.s .rr 1u.hn.logi..
l.,Lrrdrri.s, lh. .rore lrjali lcl ir{l\
dlr.,gdrl 0alhs, lile tltering lecisioN ard
altetruU\ e fLrtures il opeDs up tor ns. lciDg
essenti!lll rnoral. Scicncc crnnot rDdnill
nott.llnshowtoch.os.orivhrl 1..hoose.
Onl] Rrligio. Innid.s us,!ad rrrr)s Lo
nrrig.lr tole.LiaLLr Iixustirr brrg!ir)s
I hro!sl, (leliuetLiDg clear perirnetc'rs of dglit
IIIR()SHIIIA S LTCACY/ lh., .rse
sl,,,1r o1 lio$ \re.,aIrEel !urlear
Le(ltn,)logr' \Li!ul.l gi!e us enough reason
r! $h) \'e reed rtliijbn in r scicDtificalh
to
aclr{nctd n)ci.t1. Phlsicists \Lho wo*.d
ontlcfirst xtomicbomb nr thc \lrnhrlta.
Proj..trr.r.d..fl\'nro ill.d br lhr le(jlJle
hu ar' cod !.rid llirlsliiruald Nagasrlii
lor tLeir $orli. Norse. their ir!.nti(r l.d
to lhe (reation oftht nuchar aNrs rdcc rnd
rD orarpoi{.furg $sc ol fo]itnll tr.rnoir
tl t t.rsists to t|is dr!.I'blsi.isi F,..mrn
BR0,\DtRPtllPlOVt5 /rrn.ir!1tr(t rriir/r,r issrc
l)1s.. l.l.i, srid. "lll.,..!,,r tl,al (tl)e
b,)n'b) $as d,opped \as j!st tl,rt ,roLod!
hnl the rou[Se or lhe foresight to sr! no.
11r blanrct techrical aDogxncc and th.
illusnD ofsod likc lmiv.r tbr olcBvb.lnr i.s
ti..o.rnro.s. ns. .l lh. srieflilir
(omm!ritv. Free of the ethical
framework laid dorvn by our
rcligious beliel.s, science $,ill instead
be dfiven byour habits, our politics,
our selfish inclinations, our
ecoDomic systems and our
colnpetitive d ve to know. What
will be the eqnivalcnt oflliroshima
1br the 2tst centuly now that our
technologies have become lar more
frightcning, [oreign and groul,Icl
breakiDlt? lhe possible (Le(nnltnD ofour
b sphcrc l!
nxnotcdrnologl ru! rmol?
Th. cr.rti(D ofr lnrdcm crstc srst.m $itb
rs t..t.rirg or t.f an.l r nriss ol ll rsl,nlel,
n+.llio,Ls i,1iici.L l.l.illise.L belrAs at LLe
lr!tlorn:' llre djl!tion ol !rr Setretic pooi
be!!usc of x ncontriD cd grnctic
cnginrcring? Thc.rcrtion of bh.k h.l.s
t]ulks to.n atom rsld gon. r\ il'?
l HI,l ltOAl) Ll.lSS l ROl)l)lili/ XI{nI
deo llo$ Religion futs Science on ashol1
lcrsh. hniting scicntifi. crtloratioD .nd
tl!s hum.n frogrcss. B!t thti q,,esljors
1hl tt.ligion D.ses N,e nece\srrr rrd c!1
Lo llre lrearl: llt)to trrrlt ntQt hunrDl
Ltul)lrtllta orl n1ar. i( lrlg.fss do u.
rt\l|u tlttd ta.hx t11.! lttr'\d? O l,ris th.
onstr.r lt. iD n1Ltl1 nn,a'fun.loDtn1nl
rrrr!rrstD D/ /,r,i,.r,r /rc(ttt at u)ill? Li,
(hat t.tl da rrr fi,rir. oll 1/r.s.
n\:lIr)laqit\ ruotsl V11! do r\i tl. the
lhirqs /idi u,do.')Tne. $.. n sthonour
ou go.L-girtD irltrcDt hrunrD curiosit!.
1rhL. frc.dom ol inf.r.rrtion r.i
r.li.oNl.dg. th. criffli.g elle( t ol !!lli|g
too,r rl restrictioDi oD the pursuit of
hrowledge. lut rs ThoretN onc slnL:nc
will be 'rirh in frofortnr t{) thc nrmln'
ol thilgs rrc cln rflor(i to lct .lonc.'
\Vc Drust dis.cnr rrt k..\lodge ir loo
d.rdsercus 1o r!A!e und rhi(h rords are
besl left urtrodden. \\'e need noi risk
elrtthing that is noblcn xn.l bcst nr tlris
worldfor thc sakc olfrrfit orJrst oD. mor.
f.ck ilto laDdora s box. T|. Ih.h.rL1.r.
Pro;ecl s ph\sicisls will teslih to that.l,
 rJt\t tN!l lllxll"l6lil

"l

A80UI Illt rr TtR

0 8PO{D[P
DrR P.L r- / '

"Man is omnipotent."
MOSTLY I'RUtr. BL]IT NOT IN THE \vAY THAT
$rtr WANT/ Itk njndbosslins when you r€allr think
about it. We opentcon brains on a dailybasis, grow
lifc at will in pehi dishes, pilot nachines that can
reach great heights and depths, peek at uDiverses
n,ill:ons.r. oillr"ns o lrl"J"1n awa\. r.!olutio.li.e
agriculture inelds, and rcad the genetic code that makes
up the esseDcc ofhurnan life. Man has been able to
wield so much poh€r and control ove. his envircDnent
and ensure his continuance and domiDance so
successluly in a hostilel\'orld that it is little wonder
he thinks he is omnipote . Is it very surprising that
{F" ".!e.p\\plrp\el}al i i,onh amdll"r ot .im-
J|d nni' \ hniorp ue .oloni,F \pd.e :n\Fr. rirnp
tralel, resurrectthe near dead from freezers aDd sei
to live oul olll lives as ghosts ni the niachnre? Scie!rc,
Man crows, is rhe sirgle nost powcrtul tool at his
Thc problen is when IIan brandish€s power like bols
showing offtheir nelr tot6. $rhat does ii also say about
our species that now more than ever, we are able to
liil] our fellow mer nio.e efficiently or - depending
on your politics - more painfully on a wider scale,
dcl, rn ne t-,e rtFl-'gpn, e dn,l hedlth
" uJr brbie.
and perhaps their athletic abilities in tuture, not drink
twjce about duplicartug or modifying thc things
we eat on a dailybasis andbuild larsc scale projects
ll Bc0lDtR PfRSPt0lVtS,1,?'
WAITli Tt] 5
ffit ftrtY:
l]OW DOtS TTII]|lOIOGY
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
Uslnsodhdplinehoppins
e,ort\ of the Tower of Babel trusiins carelessly that exofi(lloro ro $e 8ig Bons,
$'e have techDolosical soluiions to deal with any
ervironnental fallout? Whjle not doubtingthe scale
and success of Man s material prosress and the
elevation ofgenerations out of tlie stan'ing clasles,
such incredible amounts of power exercised on a daily
basis by scientists, engineers, military men and
politicians should worry us a lot more.
Man's omnipotence is dubious and troublins because
such power is wielded less rs a benisn ad ben€volent
force but more like an amoral 5 year old drowning a
whole colony of ants in the gaden. lhis mixhre of
arrogancc, curiosi\,, emotional detachment and
.on pell',rg nppd.o \Fa,hjg, ro rh. :'tusjiil, orrir5ro I
can put manldnd at tremendous dsk every tiDe a ne$'
technologl, enelges. our collective need io know can
rrr.geirom,\e.r'sJr|,s rhe po.sibiitiF. oiu.ing
animals as drus facto es to the norbid fascin.ttiorl
with breeding chjmeras. Any arising corcems are
bru.led asid" in rhe nimF olpru;Fss J10 pcnnnnr...
or by the complacetrce that Man has ihings under
control. This is especially so today since scjentificand
techtlolosical applications arc continually held hostage
by corporaie entities more interested in the monetary
and military gains to be made than any vasue or
possible ethical quanda['.
i,r ? tr r rlts - r' ;,:ue
 WATihTt]L5

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
rotks/rleu/id/8a
be recosnisablyhunan decadeslron now or will the
assertion ofsuch rawDoNcr mean the eitinction of

prilrriisrhhieroglyphnr
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'
o..i.in 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
jt
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. +\!

 SURI]HS

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

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

 ESSAY MAN{EO\IER

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 ofcrfi.itv 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. rcnlenth.rs 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 e.f.lt
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 prodLl.cd 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 aryu.rent 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 ofClcm.ni 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.

I\'IA(]RO O\:I'RVIL'IV/
>/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.]

E5sAY MAltEO\lIR

I5T PARAGRAP|| rhc most imlortant

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

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

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
I

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

I J/larlJ 1c
I

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

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

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 m.bl;h/
J

unilerstcndineof rutrentdeveloDments,
po,nts will h; madc out ol (onre\t and
I
;{ a3eJ ,.r se/rsh hce,!3. 1:1 ;3 lheftLte ;//a31tat",t th.1 5-.;e1y I
aDoccr trivial. The useofthe d\manrite
I
,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;. te.tt'-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
I
-ar zotrily lat ;1 ,3 the 5-rd hae,ts ^'h- a" r"?a,re/ 1- /- th;':
thouaht c lirrle nroft (r4r yecrs aheadl
I
q"h." ;t ;s nol a c-2,:"rn ./ 3c;ch1;3t3, le..4s" ;1 ;3 ler/..J thc;t
I

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
"bl/"a
l/p arc5 thal .chtr-,/ llE D-r/.t.hd.re 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
'-.,ely
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 .-h.et,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
"pp*"*t"
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 a.hk;,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 y.ht./ 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
""-'
d'e
'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

ISSAY MAKEOVER

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/ a.at;./ h-1 .,/y thc e/;tca' 1/12.t they .t"
ar opposing point of view ard balan.es
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
te.,/;1,y',
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'/'
TTtl PARAGRAPH rri"
"
** *.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"c.us"
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".,:"
'a.h
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 th.it tlt.y te,,i231 la/:/:;hq -h.a

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

OUR SUGGESTED NTAKEOVER
FOR 3 OF Cl.rMrN l S IIOS t PROBLIjIIATIC PA1]tr\GRr\PIIS/

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 s.tc'!?&,??iaion riJ,(l

 ISSAY MAKEOVER

IN SUIII{ARY/

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

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

a
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 rcsea.ch.
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
'nay
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

L
20 ER0lDtR PlRSPttTlVtS tlescience& rcli.rion
'ssu.
A MATIER OT OPINION

c(t,(JMN /

N()

ALLO$ED /

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

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
'upl|
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, $€ll, produce? Alrcady, the nrilitary fantasises of creatirg
Lo. Alge. .,r.sd l Dnlo.r n.n" ,l of.l ' rr".i". senetically enhanced humans witli bionic capacitv
are jusi fisments of nnasination? Think asainl \' F,I ran:r Iu., ,, ,n lld,t c, le\:/rdal "'/.,a
r|. hrre m.nster$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

 RIIATID 55UI'
P0Ilcs
st tNct IIHtt5
has . |ugealgelical Ch.istirn cultur and Snrgapore
er 6OVIRNMINT
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.,.

arguDrcntsl

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:

lLlstea.l of aDs\criDgth.s. soul searchiDg ctuestio!s,
all we hcar is thc rnanfua ol stem cell researchers:
stcm c.ll therafl has the potential to draDraticallr,-
change dre lreaLrneDt ofhunan discasc. But does
rhis noble souD(lirs eD.ls justifi thc Drcans? What s
lhe noral point $'c want to mike {he we build a
life-saiiDg sollltion uDon a stackofenbrp corl)scs?
I am sad to see the ;nevitable iDtemrtional march
to\{.}ds sten) cell research bccausc of simple
p.o
'onr. L., rnr,D:Ihl I s l:,$ rr'l,cr\ hat ing
to erse up on prc\ious linils sel on stenl(ell
reseuch.nd ftrndingduo lo (oDlpctition fi onr
lcss rcstrictirc, hore pr{gmatic lsian D.tions
likc Sorth l(orea.l am vert concemcd t|at a loung
coonL..' lile Sinsrpore isbccoDrins. Iaven lb. stem
cell research as jt aspircs to b. a bio edicaL liub.
SjDgrpore has b.cD able to atLract rnanr young
Etrropcan and Arnerican scientists $'lD hav. bc.n
liustrated br their own rountries' iass rcstidnrg llre
use ol certain lines of sten cells. ftough SoLrlh Korca
t00KllG tvDElHt
To do this, thc rvorld s largest and highest cDcrgv
BRA]IIIN RIAI I ]\II
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
rcscarclrdoilr dubious patlis to abidc by an ctlir'al
,i,rid In,i..iIIi ..,'LI,', \,l ecoroIic
suicide" argurnents. Wcll, Dron.v isr'i everythjrg.
LleD UNISCO dc(idcd to ban hu,nnn clonirg
in 1997'adccision globallr accepted and advoc{ted
b1 countnes lile l.rarcc. Japan and TuDisia $'hich
all asreed tlrat human clonins i{ould devalue Lhe
dignjt! ot humaD beings aDd natural hunan
reproduction. This rras a decision not based oD
eronomjcs but on furc realisaljon that we sinth
cannot cnablc \'|at palcht knowledge $'e have to
lcad ns do$'n the gardeD prth ofa moral (or litm.l.
ir the cas€ ofihe LIIc) blackhol.l
'lo parapluase Dotcd fastoral luiler Ricli WarreD,
i{e reallv arc but rnis t.)ing to understand thc
IntcrD.t.I shonld know:t helped poi{er the Int.rDctl iE0UTTHl,fltIiR
So, $'|at I want lo do ros'is to design a tutur. of rnv
choice: choose $'hat I $'ant thc future io looli like.
rnd rork tonards t|at. at

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

 A MAIIIR OI OPINION
solLrlion to Nlan s nany
that God is beloDd
nodolheisis h!u1d
hx\c mo.e doctrnral
ol
objcdioDs wirh son€
sciencc\ m.re erlr€Ne
Tho IrN Fdn.aiional.
Scicntill. and Culrural
Organisation
{UNEsco) ad!ocares
thc actLjfg ol global
ethical slard..ds a.d
forges !nive.sal
agrt.nrc ts on the
handling of ethical
issu.s. UN ESCL)
bnrc.uorts $.orld
locus on t}e need to
diss.ninale and shar€
scientilic knoNledg€ so
the rvorld c.n Drc$es.
They would quesrion
$hcthcr teor,!ddites
in all Lhei. ot€r
protcctiveness, $ill
harn the verv thnrgs
ther want to save
in thcir obsri nac,t
rdva s tccbological
solLrtions a.d gi!iDg
scientists tne ar€edon
A Hindu UNESCO
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
but surely moderating its progrcss is
enough as opposcd to eliminaling it
conpletely? I anr apfalled that $ere arc
those who call for science to be qnashcd especiallv
$lren s.ien.ehas madc life bea ble for the sick. and
sil€n hope to the abject. Scieme should be only mildly
res ated and Neo Luddiies ca g forsciencetobc
put on a bal and chain I fcar, be a danger rather
'!ill,
ln this Dew ilorld ofscicntific progress. the march
"sr-d .r-r , .. re.pa-rh du, lo rlub.'l .ompel'r'n
is inevitable. The .ed ction in stem cell research
fundnrs nr the USA has resulted in established
Dames loolins for more scientific necdon abroad,
andwhat with Gcmany abolishing its 2oo2policy
allowing its scientists to usc or y existing cell lincs,
the racc to becom€ the biggesi biological hub is on.
Singapore's focus on the research-irtersive sector
to diversi{y its econonic bale confimN that science
is advancing at a speed nerer before knoim to eist,
and t{,ing to rcgulatc tiris speedy gro$1h caD cost
counties more than its econonv.
Where ethics is coDce.ned, you would e\pect my
paDtheist belicfs to ciash $'ith that of m)' motrotheist
peers, but surprisingll theytoo see no objcction to
'\! ur nJ \.Fl.e d\ J pi!.o. dn !\dr n tv.r 's
counilcss problems. lve agrcc that exploring sciencc
does not bv itself pose a threat io maD or liis humaniry
but it is what nc do reith the discovcry tliat could
ha.n or violate codcs ofethics. UnderstaDdiDs the
24 BR0ADIR PtRSPtfilVts r]t. s.ien.. & reliqion tssle
biolog,\' ofcmbrylnic stem cells is what the scientists
in UX hope to do by jnserling hnmaD DNA into
hollowed eggs doivcd ftom caLtle. A Nco-Luddite
.nr ' ,.q s"ll i\ .har li.l-'brid nd-", hnnd . '
mark of nanufadured as opposed to organic ljfe but
I do not bclieve ae are dullnrg ourhunaDity when
this sobstitution protects rather thaD destroys the
htrman egss. Likewise the Us Food and
Der€topmeor A horitr GiDA) publishcd a rcpoft
..ntJ r;pr-, i\a'-forn it or'"buJr.on.,,l rcnl.. r'
'i
milk andmeatproducts obtaincd froni cloned cattle
in 2c)l16, concludirg ihat consuneN have nothing to
be wary ol Ifthcrc has been approval ofgerelic
lot research
tupe.ing wirh aDimal species
or consuDrption, thcn I aD rr€ there is no need
fo. scicntific expLoration to be kept on suc| a tight
EsseDtially if sciencc $'ere to be regulaicd, global
cthical sta|dads have to be set lirst, an cxample
benrs UNIISCO'S 1997baD on human ctonils.
it is not ne.ely globally acccpied, but adlocated br-'
.o' rIr,, ..r' I r' I ran.c. lrpxrr an(l Iunisir
Nhich all agrec that cloning undeDnnres the dignity
of liunaD beings andthe concept ofnailral human
rcprcduction. ln accordaDceto ny beliei!, every mar
is onc i{itli all beings in ihc cDtn€ uDileNe. The Luritr
of all selvcs neam that if I hann aDother man, I harnr
I myself: Good corlduct and risht cthics are the highest
of dharma andirust nie when I say that the UN has
achieved this delicatc aDd enormously difiicult task
of providing n moral framervork to scieniific
 IlRATIDISJUI5
P0t. T t5
( tlitt ftIc!
G0[fRNt{tit1
lt G]lN

!rr1(ll lH S

THtUNi.IRSt1]l.lASIR]IIC
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 onr.lu... 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 rlo.rs 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 thi.gs r.d
liling bcirgs, rrcjnst matt.r.

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

tolclr
bur.iu.ml. I hrre \eer (hrnle l)olitics. Is a
i1
, .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
.Lo
rn.l cloos. il 10 lnat 1l,e (oslrjc sell I rcalitv. f:

8l0lDI!orD.ll
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

SiNGAPORI A HAVTII fOR

STIl\,1 itI RtsIaRtH

2006/08/r//bu5iner!

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 lle.ck 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
"r.
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)r.ss 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

(oi

elrbi*rtioD on iLs sl.nr tlll aDd crb, i(l jouDcr $ere !trinlr'
lioDr rf onotlrcistic reljgl.lLs.rnnnuritl€s. lIiD\ Sirgxloft rn
Chisti rs.,l.ivs !nd IlL,sll.rs 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 $ficthertliere is a God.Without. Snfrcme C.e.rlor.IIan
\
crnrotbc accused oldislortilg IIis pla. b] ftrkcdrgwith nattrc
lD rdlilio., Buddhisl.\.n t.rches Li,irl lilc nrl corri: irlo
bcirs irL ! \N.n'ry ofNa\s. ol which sci!ai q)rodlriiur is lrrrr
onti r[te, ! s.\dr] rc]rrxhi(ljon hrs no dj\ i..ll srncti(lLed
0.ioritr over ,)lh.r nlodcs o1 pd'.crtron. l,jle .rn th.rcfore
b.gi. nr mxn\ \.rrs iDd. theollsjmll!. cl)Dn)g roL,l(1 rot l)c'
see. rs i fr)Lrlenuln' ln lu)lo8r. Iiir Lhurur.. irr cr)nlust to
oLlrer nrriDstrerlr n'ligrons. llu(L,lhists regrll hlLmrn
ituli\ idrulill rs an iLlL,si!i] .r mirage. cknrirg \tould Llrercl.n
not threirter or dc\rlue L|. |.r$malilr ,), rhrra(ter ol rn

8 BRil0,l P R\ft lt

OB I!-\RKERS/ Nso, nost ofthc monothcists r!ho
disagree i{itli the state's policy oD life scicDccs do not
dispute it bqond thcir brcthrcD, bei.g rell sc|ooled
in thc govcrnmcnt's Dolict to keeD Dublic debate I;ee
frod an!-discLrssion l]1religir,n. lhis policyto keep
t}e plblic sphe.e deljberatelt neutral my not be the
best nar to engender loDg-tern $cial matu tv but
it certaiDll Dnkes serse in the short tenn, considcriDg
the niultjple nxtive aDd rcgional rcligio!s
seDsibilities SjDgaDorc has to DreseNe.
IN Tlllj GRE/\TER GOOD lVE TRUST/
Scoltish novelist J. M. Barrie
commented that "One's religion rs
whatever he is most interested in."
Singapore's government and
Singaporeans themselves are
undeniably most interested in
economic sustainability and
progress; if stem cell research and
creating cybrids can help achieve
that, then it cannot be faulted.
T]1e starkest differ€nce between the nations where
the debateisthe bottesthas to do with the fact that
many Western constitutions (USA, UK, GernuD,
are founded upon Judeo-Chrisiian tenets or liberal
democratic values while Sinsapor€'s is not. Simply
p,r.. b"ca.bp oI ou- L.lieI\. b' dn ro, violal oi
"pp
of ethics where oihers do. It jsjust not part ofthe
Singapore ideology of pragmatism. We tend to
prioritise practical solutions lhat help the greate.
(econornic) good abore uplioldins concepts like
humaD rights, hunur disDit), aDimal ishts ct al.
Secularism etnrSujshcs ficry zcalous altcrcations
with tire cool ov.r dnrg logic of .conomic surlilal.
29 ER0AOIR ptKpttTW! r/rr
SURITl] 5
6IRMAII II1i/MIKIiS
t,{st M il0 sT!!1
Glt RtstrlRCH
mrkltlDohh|]evy'dl]
sll]471967200804|?P
o!cN!mber?&v!tuoB'
0ndr:home-0
J USl l H l.l llAcl S, NI. AI\l/ OLtr nationil ideoloe)
offragnraiism has defined our country s approach
lo scierce andtechnoLos/. Singapore lias been nised
on a technocratic dream. To us, society's nost
dauntins problems can always be solved with ihe
pmctical application of the ght technology and
knowledse. The Singapor€an education system s
lire5.Uirlcr rhc hi
approach to scientific education primarily focuses
on the good that science can bring rather thaD the
responsibilities that science must uphold.
,/ri h". o l(jrYed lolmpori
Wc arc taught iD our classroorns that sienever socie,ry
l,llly l, ?001 rcrlr|'rhof
pnshcs thc tcc|Dological bir.iers a.d elerlbodl
becornes smarter, ]ratpiness. pr osperilr .rnd pr og.ess
inevitably follolvs. Elhics has never be€tl a part of ifipre(rl[ed.
our educati.,n ir scierce )et rnothe. outconie of
our decisjoD io keep the public sphere free of xni
hnit ofrelisi{rus discussion. Wc arc onl) k.cn on the
practical facts, not th. thilosothical diflerences
bchindvaning scjentific theories lile er,olLltion and
eationisnr o. Lhe potential ethical diLeDlmas
fr€senled by adificiil intelligence orthe life scieDces.
Ir view ofthe increasinglv trcachcrous stakcs out
bcforc ns in tcrnN ofsci.ntific idv.nces, ne i{ould
bc wisc io notdepend on lnaginatism to be tlie sole
arbito of oLrr decisior naking. Lilie it or not,
the .luesl io ns .aised bv olhernations aboutwhether
our neu'est techrologies comproniise our humaD
digrit), nal1h s biodir€.sitr aDd thc saDcti\ of lifc
are valid aDd sisrlificaDt for Man's fniDrc. If \re are
Dottalking about them at all in Singapore, it oughL
to distu r us profoundly. Ultimately, while
pragmatism has been an ideology that has brought
much profit to Singapore's ecoDomy, it should not
malrc us too prod to qtrestior why people elsewhere
choose ditrerently from !s ard whether it will sene
ou tuture generations better ifwe wer€ to reconsider
our stand. rt
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

OUR
POSTHUMAN FUTURE
I,'INI)INC DANIEL C.
DAR\\TIN'S
(;,ou DENNETT
enitint Bnq'*

FRANCIS FUKUYAMA

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].bi.is 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 '$.J,r.'.l .n"rFd.:,".
,. 3. IGINNETII NILI.ER'S
liukuyaDra questions \dheihcr biotechnology lil\DING D,\R$ 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))
I HFI
lrE0UIIHl !'lR TfR
.eject scicnce. effecLjvelt comniittitig intellectllal Like Da\dkins, philosopher D.nDctt's two lnajor
ricide. Hc puts fo.th 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.,", .,


rIIE RICHARD
CREATION
tl,. o. wIl.soN
scens ro be universal anons Homo SapieDs.
r r-r
n-tl.re.r i L "\cieItificanrhsisofretigions,
rol\rnolhd 11. t,...,r'^iF.rul.1,t i. a,-FiE:uL
beliefitseu, b tthe conictior rhat reljgioD is oirlimits
to scient ific iDquiN.
5. tr.o. wll-soN's
THE CREATION (2(,06)
'l
hrlugli th is book. biologist a nd sec lar humaDisI L.o.
$rilson tries to bridge the gap berween science
aDd rcligior in the hope of p.eseNing rhe
biodiversity of tr{rth A fome. Brpiisl. Witson
chose Lhis iillc becansc ne lolei{ t woutd rosonrtc si rh
clangeiical Christians a srouD thrt he believcd $as
so vast and influenlial rhrl without its support,
inrportant illobrl goals could not be rcached. Ires€nted
irnovati!€ly as. lerter sernonising to a licrional
Sotrthem lirptist niDistcr., WilsoD drails atrerrjon to
thc De€d forboth belic\€rs and non belicvers to worti
together iftlel genuile\ carc about crcarion
RICHARD DAI{K]NS'
THI.I cOD DIjLUSION (::oo8)
No stranger toruiting bools learnrg dowl religioo (tjkc
his carlier flte Blind Wot&tnakct), contr.oversial
erllutionist Richard Da$(ins, a protessorofrhe pubtic
UDde.standing ofSci.nce at oxford, oDce agani fikens
rcligious thith to a discase and s.ls as his goal
convincing his rcaders thar atheisnr is r '.braye,,
aspiratior. tlo$'cver. as fc'llow scieDtisr O$€D cingedch
poirlts oxt, in sinultaneouslr defendi.g evolurionaDd
insistiDg upon alheism in rhis booli_ Dr. Ild\!kjns
frobabl) sirsle hrDdedlr nakes nnrrc converts io
irltciligent d.slit! than anr oftle teadirg intetiigenr
Jl Bl0{Dl t Dl
RSTn.V.5 tt ,..4r. ^.1..t ..i ...
I
Heroes&Villains
rri D,rr,,ri"{ ii", ii, rit . ir rr cti. ,,qirq ti ra.r,rr {,.
'irLtr
h
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
en€rgy pa{icle accele.ator lvili ftrall} be acinated.
nraHng one 78 )ur old Pr.fcssor pctcr Hjggscspecirly
lLapty. With t|e $orld s lars.sr arom,snrasher iI
ofoalioD, Hjggs can finalll sce jl his ct€gart 1964
sohrionto one of thc grear pr.)bted$ x;th rhestand.r.d
Drodel ofph)sicswas rlght rfto all. I Ie froposed malre.
|ad rDass, rllowingirio makestarc, planets anitpcopte.
He belicv€d the unilerse$,as p€nadcd by an lrvisible
field ofbosoDsthat coDsisted of nuss buttitri. etse.,Ls
puticles movc th ruugh t|is lield, bosons etrcdirely stict<
to some oftheln, making them Dore massi\e, {,hite
leaving othcrs to fass utrhindered. phorotrs, tisht
tarlicles thal halc no nass, .re not affected b!,lhe i
Higgs field at all. T|e Uste ous bosoD poshrlated by
ii
Higgs has becomc sr,Iuldanrentat to fhJ,sics thal it is
ofter nicknancd the "cod particlc". ObsennnB jt Niil
!
allolr physicisrs the s'o d over to ffia v lill jn the
nissing liDks'in the StandardXfodel ofph),sics, exttain
holother clenr€ntaI] padiclcs acquire propeLlies such
as Dass and enabtc lnore understandilg ofth. secret
nrechanisms of clecfuc,Dagn etisn and ilravitatiorr. (,
i
The LHC itself
\rILlr\IN / U or-tunately, Dot everyrne $elcoDres rhe
LHC. Thoxgh fnnd€d andbxilr b\, thc 2,ooo scientists
irll-re,, b ar,rb5,r',\pFit . Jn, tj nnr-torie,,n
35 countrjes, naysayers hive ir.€n raDtinil .rbo t
apocalvptic "\4ra I if
sccnados, mosth ceDt nBaround
the accidental creatioD of nrassirc Ea.rti{tevoLrrinsbtack
iiolcs. strangelets aDd antimate.. .'Conce.Ded U.S.
citizen'Walte. Wagner has alreadl fiied a laa.sDir nr
Hawaii against CERN and lhe U_S. DepartDre t of
T
Eneryv iD .r bid to stop the LItC fi.on being slvitched
on bcfore i tull saietvaDalysis iias been caded out.It
i
I
I
li
I
REBOOT YOUR MIND

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

THE CHINESE
ROOM ANALOGY
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
a
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 elerlbo.lv 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 ..
1B)

it God does ndl.ri3l (-e) ll

own mind.

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


SCHRODINGER'S CAT
CarLoons like flellsitg, t.iihaaDro
and Yr.GLOh I .efer.nced it. So did
popular Arnerjcan drarra,ryr,re
ru.r. Thoriilh this nrysteioxs cat
Las appeare.l ir pop cult c .rany
timcs, it is trull .nind-bos'rijDc.
ODe ol th. rnost puzzling things
Axstrjan ph!sicisi jtri{iD
Sch.6diDg€r found iD the
Copenhager int pretrtion oI
quantum rnechaDics i!as the co.celt
of suferposition: r state Ulat
conbined all thc p.rssiblc l)osirioDs
ofa $brtomic luJticle. Sc|tding.r
ill slrited dre oddncss of thar
assu nrptiim by irmginiDg a scena o
$'ie.e r catras put
nr a sealedbox
lvherc the cafs lifc deperlde.t on Lhe
state 01 a srbatoniic parlicle.
Li thc CopeDhagen interymlaLjon
of q rnlum mc.banics, . s)steni
stotx beilg r supe.uosition ol srates
and becones cithe. onc or lheothcr
$'hen aD observ:rtioD rrl(€s placc.
This irnpljes thrt rile Llie box is
closed, t|e syst.nr erists in a
supertositioD of b.rLh siatcs of
''decaycd .uclelrs/dead cat and
''uDdcca!ed Ducleus/ljviDs cft '.
WhcD the box open and aD
obscNntion is made, the $,avc
fnnction collapses into ole ofthe
To put it simply, t]1e cat
remains paradoxically
both alive and dead
until the box is opened.
t_
33 ER0lDtR PtRSPtfilVts
O(KHAM'5 RAZOR
(or 0t(Al'4'5 RA70R)
r{ th ceDtury ljnglish philosophcr aod
niar William of oclham dcvised a
sinipl. device of logical thinting that
has bccorne r Nle oftlinnb iD thc
crcation of scientific rheorics.
His analrsis was that in rrving to
crp)anr anyp|eaomcnon, ne sho d
rnake as fenassumptions as possjble.
As Iong as we hid multiple
conpeting theorics that \rerc €qual
in othcr respects, the nrcst loSical
choicc lvoukl bc to selectthe Lheon
that rcq u ired thc feuest as$nrtptioDs
aDd fostulatcd the fewcst entiti.s.
octham's Rnzor is usuatly
paraphrrsed
^ "All other
things being equal, the
simplest solution is the
best."
ri. s.i.n.? & r clioun iss,r
PAVLOV'S DOG
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
who mcrel! reacts to a situarion
iDstead ot tiiiDking rationallv.
Rrssian thysician.nd p*rhologjst
lvaD Pirvlov obserled thar dirgs
could be coDditio ed iDto certain
rcfl,r\ responses hkc salivrtins
through a scies of.liffcrcnr stinlrli.
Although t|e dog initialll saliv.ted
onlvxit]r tbod prcserLed before jt,
it subconsciously began ro sali!ate
as i!.ll ivhen ithcard abell r|ar had
prclioust). becD souD(led \rhenerer
thcre lras preseDtrtior of food.
Sometiow, nr.egardless ol wheth$
tbod was in ffont ofit, as loDg as ir
|eard the ircll souDd the dog would
salivatc a u tomatically. Xlosr
popularl)' kDoi{n as Pavlovian
coDditionhg, his theorjcs on how
people could be
conditioned i nto
certain behaviours with
the right stimuli led to
the foundation of
modern psychology
and the philosophy of
the mind.
 ,l
E
'::=)J:t:

4
,l_a..=

o
::-:a
t

E--=i-Ii;:rz!
E|e"ry+;1i:rq
r E4
i;
lq o
t'l .l 5sgBE6 I

:.=:
$n€
gd EE i ^ I
I F ? nt;*:i
ri.-fi
l*r\ I 'Et$a+3
s
48-f A:3

I 1&3eFg
ag:!cF
i='tTh-.I 15
€;
o

*gi. riFgg'i[H 9E
##
a

! =
n
{!
+- =
II srE+gs
f
=
eF
: qE c6EEeq
= ;;E:C4
I E
E 1d":;:

$
i-;E =

1+4.
.{4
eFi
E rSfi**i
= ^
=
Ae
r*:B;
En3ii
;t?:
i=;*u lige
r,F.k' .
/ a '..,:
tz:
€'FE
+ =
=
E
_
gFEsi
E
:s tPfiri' i2i!
r +4! _ ).'
:r, \-
'\ats :

'fiSr'^
*iq i,

ir'
F
:sE
ztlit
*eor I ,,;;!o'{
:i
ii,=
.
rioE

.a!
!4. _
el iE-ib€
'EH-+
r
EF= E-,E
I
g-c
g:H
)r
B
:- 5
ii=E /'>u-''. ,'
rE (n--
t'

a =i ' e
:;

!
=E
;j 'F'
EF \-''3
';,'l
,,'; '
e
!€E
o (.
a :

o
I

; g E cr:E
il;
i:i
FE
a
7
J 1= :fii15" F>
o
c
o
o
o
i
E T ! *
:5 R
D$geIFEEH :r-
= ,
- El*H€=
;f ii:=
1-;;€
;E- Y:
o X
o
I
a

F
:::::::3:,i
JI'
iiiiiiiiiiii iiiililiiiiiiiiiiiiililiiiiii
r..;....................
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

iiiEa=
z
-{