I was doubly surprised and pleased with Obama's head nod towards science in his inaugural address. In recent history, science & technology and politics have intersected increasingly, and his definite attention towards this trend was welcome.
Policy has come to both regulate science & technology and be influenced by it. Laws regulate and define appropriate uses of technology, especially important after the advent of the internet. New developments in science (eg. stem cell research) bring to the table novel problems and therefore legislation.
But policy has also become increasingly dependent on science. For example, in the landmark opinion of Roe v. Wade, Justice Blackmun offered (well, an admittedly arbitrary) evaluation of the situation viewed under the lens of science. Though faulty, the fact that science and technology had been used in such a significant decision may be prophetic of what will influence future legislation and decisions.
As a proponent of research and development in sciences and technologies, I appreciated Obama's pledge.
Do you think that a turn towards science and technology in policy making will bode well for us, or do you think that we should stick to precedents, even in changing times?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think we must update our policies based on the newest, most compelling data available. For instance, when numerous studies show abstinence-only sexual education doesn't work to keep teenagers from having unprotected sex, the U.S. government loses credibility by continuing to fund such programs. I am very excited by Obama's pledge to govern not by ideology but by facts and what works. Its about time!
I agree with you Stephen. Such methods as socio-analysis and surveys, which garner statistics from controlled studies, should be used increasingly in determining policy. We should use facts to determine ideology and not the other way around. In a patchwork country such as the United States, one idea can not be said to be more legitimate than another without unbiased proof.
Post a Comment