Should we really keep Politicians away from Scientists?

Sir Paul Nurse has ‘weight’ when it comes to science. His position is the head of The Royal Society in the United Kingdom and in an address in Melbourne he suggested that we need to keep politicians away from scientists: “It also emphasises the need to keep the science as far as is possible from political, ideological and religious influence,” he said. And I’m wondering whether he is right? Should we really be keeping these areas separate?

Industry Search reported that ‘…Sir Paul told some his peers at the University of Melbourne on Monday that scientific advice should be based on the consensus of scientists who are experts in the area concerned, who are fully aware of conflicting explanations and the evidence on which these divergent views are based. “As a further check this advice needs to be challenged through peer review carried out by other expert scientists to ensure the conclusions reached are reliable and secure,” He says if there is no strong consensus it is important that should be reflected in the advice, homing in on the global warming debate to illustrate his point…’

So I’m wondering if what Sir Paul is really discussing is the difference between interference and involvement? Because laced within Nurse’s suggestion is that Political influence is always a bad thing and that pursuit of science is always ideology free. There’s no doubt that there are plenty of examples where science and politics have been used poorly or erroneously whether deliberately or not. A great example is John Grant’s book ‘Corrupted Science: Fraud, Ideology and Politics in Science’ which provides some great case studies.

Yet Sir Paul’s suggestion raises some questions for me – Isn’t scientific inquiry the process of building knowledge? Isn’t politics the art of societal management? Doesn’t the polity need to be better informed? Doesn’t society benefit from the ongoing improvement in understanding that scientific inquiry almost always leads to?

Arguably the answers to each of those four questions is Yes. Which brings me to the thought bubble – Isn’t the INVERSE of Paul Nurse’s question required? – we need politicians to be CLOSER to science not further away from it. We need our politicians to be more informed, more engaged, more involved. That of course comes with the risk of interference but we have that now anyway. The difference with the current situation is that often the interference occurs through a poorly informed polity and perhaps the reason for that is due to a lack of connection between the areas. So maybe, just maybe, we need these two areas more closely aligned?

So I’m not convinced that the idea of ideology or political ‘influence’ is be default ‘bad’ for science. What we may need is more scientists using politics as a sounding board and more politicians as scientists – a blending not an isolation?

The next great space age – inside the human brain

Mar 18, 2014

n a recent piece in the New York Times, Thomas L Freidman’s article ‘If I had a hammer’ discussed the new book by Erik Brynjolfsson & Andrew McAfee’s new book ‘The Second Machine Age’ and the development of computing power now making even complex employment positions redundant. Whereas in the first machine age, human muscle…

Jobs of the future – some advice for parents

Mar 17, 2014

I was interviewed for this article earlier last year and now it seems it has more currency than ever, so I’m reposting the link here. As a parent, what steps can you take to ensure your kids are well placed for a fulfilling career? This article offers some thoughts

When Organisational Visions are Statements of Delusion

Mar 2, 2014

For over a decade I worked with organisations in for profit, not for profit and government sectors. I’ve advised organisations in Europe, North America, Asia and beyond. Some organisations have been multi nationals, long standing, privately owned, publicly held, socially aware, profit focused and more. I’ve managed million dollar portfolios and client accounts of just…

Robotics, Ageing, and Employment – where are we and what’s next?

Feb 27, 2014

The link to the article below will take you to an overview of how robotic design is developing towards a more ‘natural’ form of human movement. To a larger extent, this is part of the normalisation process so that those of us exposed to robotics can be more accepting of their presence. This is indeed…

What type of Homework should kids be doing?

Feb 16, 2014

Occasionally I see a post that leads me to slap my forehead with the sheer simplicity of its brilliance. The post in the link below discusses the idea of homework for kids and I flag that I’m on the School Council of my kid’s Primary School, where this discussion runs rampant. The research we…

Environmental Factors and the Future Consumer

Jan 22, 2014

I’m part way through a small research piece for an FMCG company that is interested in exploring the future consumer and what kind of environmental factors might influence their purchasing decisions. Interestingly enough toward the end of last year I had three FMCG firms approach me about a similar challenge, so ‘Future Consumers’ must be…

A quick look at the ‘Repeal Day’ concept – almost right

Jan 15, 2014

The Australian Government has announced a ‘Repeal Day’, intended to be used to axe the existence of hundreds of outdated laws. The concept is a good one, though for me, doesn’t quite get the Australian Parliament into a forward looking setting in how it could develop FUTURE legislation. So what could be done instead and…

2014 – The International Year of Food Security

Dec 30, 2013

Continuing his run of suggesting an annual theme and idea of world focus for the year ahead, Futurist Marcus Barber has declared 2014 to be the International Year of Food Security. ‘The year ahead is going to bring into sharp focus, what has often been seen as an ‘other-world’ problem’ Barber says. ‘For a number…

Coming up on New Year’s Day – a look ahead to emerging issues

Dec 29, 2013

Yes I know, committing to an early morning chat on ABC Radio on New Year’s Day may to some seem tinged with the ‘what were you thinking?’ bug, but hey, what better time is there than chatting about the future, than at prime New Year’s Resolution time? You’ll be able to listen to the stream…

How your Company Vision is doing you harm

Nov 26, 2013

The Australian Strategic Planning Institute website has a new article on why Visions, rather than being useful shining lights, end up being ‘ruts’ for organisations. Counter instinictivley and yet simply put, the never ending nature of some Visions leads to an inaction toward that Vision. Companies and individuals spin their wheels in a quagmire…

« Previous
1
…
9
10
11
12
13
…
31
Next »