Letter: Science must talk to the people
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Trevor Phillips is right to identify the social control of science as a key problem for the next century ("Who will be the master of the science genie?", 19 July); and he is also right to see greater openness on the part of scientists, greater understanding of science by non-scientists, and avoiding over-reliance on the courts as important ingredients in its eventual solution. But I'm not sure that his advice to the Prime Minister to hand the issue over to "someone with the right qualifications" (whatever those might be) is particularly helpful.
The question is: how can we facilitate better democratic decision-making about socially sensitive issues arising out of science and technology? The answer is: by facilitating greater public participation in the relevant decision-making processes. If we persist in relying upon small numbers of supposed experts, be they natural scientists, social scientists, or policy-makers, the result will be further public disenchantment with science and with politics.
Across Europe, the hunt is on for new ways of involving the public in debate and decision-making about science and technology. Experiments are being conducted with citizens' juries, consensus conferences, deliberative opinion polls, people's parliaments and other formats that promise to bring experts and non-experts together to deliberate about public policy.
If science is to be placed at the service of democracy, then scientists and non-scientists must learn to do business together despite obvious inequalities of knowledge and expertise. We need to create new forums in which people can come together on equal terms. The new information technologies may help here, but in the end the key to success will be the political will to create new kinds of democratic institution.
JOHN DURANT
Assistant Director, The Science Museum
Professor of Public Understanding of Science, Imperial College, London
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments