Professor Robert Winston’s new book Bad Ideas? looks at the downside of technology. For every breakthrough, there’s a nasty side-effect or nefarious purpose it can be put to. Ahead of a lecture at Dundee University, Professor Winston told Jack McKeown about bringing science and society closer.
For all the wonders science has provided us with, the fear of technology going wrong has haunted our nightmares for centuries. From Frankenstein to the Island of Doctor Moreau, from Hal 9000 closing the airlock doors to raptors running wild in Jurassic Park, artists have been warning that each new breakthrough comes with its own risks.
But it’s not just the mad scientists or self-aware supercomputers of movie villainy we should fear: even the government cannot be trusted to act responsibly when it comes to scientific matters.
“They have their own agenda, which doesn’t always fit in with scientific principle,” argues Professor Robert Winston. “Even the most democratic of governments sometimes misuse science.
“The David Nutt affair is a prime example. He (as chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs) weighed up the scientific evidence and said it did not merit cannabis being reclassified. The Government chose to ignore this, because it didn’t fit with their populist agenda. He had to resign simply for doing his job.”
Another example, Professor Winston reckons, is Porton Down, the military ‘science park’ which is partially open to the public but is believed to be one of the UK’s most secretive and sensitive military research facilities.
“I visited it as an MP,” he continues. “They showed a group of us round the section of the facility that is open to the public then we were herded into a room for a Q&A session. I felt we were being told only what they wanted us to hear.
“When I asked what goes on in the other 7000 acres we weren’t allowed to see I was met by an uncomfortable silence.”
A medical doctor, IVF pioneer, scientist, television presenter, former MP, and life peer though he refuses to be called Lord Winston Professor Winston is a man in demand.
Among a long list of appointments and titles, he’s professor of science and society and emeritus professor of fertility studies at Imperial College, an honorary fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering, fellow of the Royal College of Obstetricians and chairman of the Royal College of Music Council. The author of a string of popular science books, his latest, Bad Ideas?, tackles the dark side of technology.
“The notion is the evolution of human intelligence, which is based on the ability to share abstract thought, mainly through the use of words, has become more and more powerful and more essential to our survival,” he explains.
“The paradox is that when we started with early technology such as agriculture, it actually shortened our lives. Agriculture began around 11,000 years ago. It was a major advance, but the evidence is that humans lived shorter lives than they did when they were hunter gatherers.
“Groups were more subject to elemental change, and because they were static there was a lack of genetic diversity. The message I want to put across is that technology is not wholly good. Every technology has an underbelly of threat.”
The combination of technology and marketing, together with a failure of scientists to make their work accessible to the lay person, has led to the dangers of science being understated or swept under the carpet.
“Much of the technology we use nowadays is extremely powerful. If someone managed to collapse the internet, for example, they would also collapse the banking system, the world’s communications, its news network, and so on.
“Another example is oil. We recognised 100 years ago that oil is dangerous, but it wasn’t underlined until in recent months when we’ve witnessed the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, which President Obama had the audacity to blame on BP. It wasn’t BP’s fault. The technology they’re using is as difficult as the technology used to land a man on the moon. When you’re dealing with very, very advanced technology, accidents will happen.
“We need to understand how to control our science better. If we don’t we’ll end up destroying ourselves.”
A couple of centuries ago, gentlemen would go to university to study ‘the sciences’. These days, students study a single field of science, then often go on to work in a very specific sector within that field. Does the fact that science is much more specialised and complex now make it more difficult for the public to understand?
“I don’t think it needs to. In the last chapter of my book, the first point I make is scientists in the 21st century have a much greater responsibility to ensure we communicate science with clarity and without jargon. If the science is too difficult for the public to understand, that is because of a lack of effort on our part to explain it with clarity.”
Professor Winston is delivering a lecture at Dundee University this evening, as part of its Book Nation event, and speaking at Edinburgh Book Festival on Thursday afternoon (4.30pm at the RBS Main Theatre in Charlotte Square).
“My work brings me up to Scotland very regularly. I’m often doing talks in Scottish universities, and I’m on the Scottish Science Advisory Council. My impression of Scotland is that there is something of a polarisation when it comes to science. In Glasgow, for example, with three universities there is a high degree of scientific literacy with some people, but in some areas of the city people hardly know anything at all about science.
“However, you’re doing, by and large, better than we in England are. You’re getting a bigger proportion of the budget and that is nothing to do with some kind of scientific Barnett Formula; it’s all won on merit.
“There’s more good science going on in relation to the relatively small population than there is in the UK in general.”
The reason for his talks in addition to the obvious publicity tour for his new book is to generate more interest in science.
“We have to take much greater responsibility for science in our society,” he says. “We need much greater scientific literacy. We need to make sure scientists are much more open and ready to listen to the community. I think we all need to be better informed about how science can be developed and what it might do.
“If you cannot always trust the Government to use science responsibly, you’ve got to make sure the population’s science education is up to scratch.”
Photo used under a Creative Commons licence courtesy of Flickr user CranfieldUni.Tonight’s talk in Dundee is sold out, but overflow tickets may be available. Click here for more information.”Much of the technology we use nowadays is extremely powerful. If someone managed to collapse the internet, for example, they would also collapse the banking system, the world’s communications, its news network, and so on.
“Another example is oil. We recognised 100 years ago that oil is dangerous, but it wasn’t underlined until in recent months when we’ve witnessed the catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, which President Obama had the audacity to blame on BP. It wasn’t BP’s fault. The technology they’re using is as difficult as the technology used to land a man on the moon. When you’re dealing with very, very advanced technology, accidents will happen.
“We need to understand how to control our science better. If we don’t we’ll end up destroying ourselves.”
A couple of centuries ago, gentlemen would go to university to study ‘the sciences’. These days, students study a single field of science, then often go on to work in a very specific sector within that field. Does the fact that science is much more specialised and complex now make it more difficult for the public to understand?
“I don’t think it needs to. In the last chapter of my book, the first point I make is scientists in the 21st century have a much greater responsibility to ensure we communicate science with clarity and without jargon. If the science is too difficult for the public to understand, that is because of a lack of effort on our part to explain it with clarity.”
Professor Winston is delivering a lecture at Dundee University this evening, as part of its Book Nation event, and speaking at Edinburgh Book Festival on Thursday afternoon (4.30pm at the RBS Main Theatre in Charlotte Square).
“My work brings me up to Scotland very regularly. I’m often doing talks in Scottish universities, and I’m on the Scottish Science Advisory Council. My impression of Scotland is that there is something of a polarisation when it comes to science. In Glasgow, for example, with three universities there is a high degree of scientific literacy with some people, but in some areas of the city people hardly know anything at all about science.
“However, you’re doing, by and large, better than we in England are. You’re getting a bigger proportion of the budget and that is nothing to do with some kind of scientific Barnett Formula; it’s all won on merit.
“There’s more good science going on in relation to the relatively small population than there is in the UK in general.”
The reason for his talks in addition to the obvious publicity tour for his new book is to generate more interest in science.
“We have to take much greater responsibility for science in our society,” he says. “We need much greater scientific literacy. We need to make sure scientists are much more open and ready to listen to the community. I think we all need to be better informed about how science can be developed and what it might do.
“If you cannot always trust the Government to use science responsibly, you’ve got to make sure the population’s science education is up to scratch.”
Photo used under a Creative Commons licence courtesy of Flickr user CranfieldUni.Tonight’s talk in Dundee is sold out, but overflow tickets may be available. Click here for more information.