Keeping Science and Technology in Check

There’s no denying that science and technology have drastically changed our way of life in the last 250 years. Moreover, to many it seems that the wheels of science and technology are spinning out of control and there’s no way to slam on the brakes. When it comes to issues as disparate as global warming and government surveillance, our ethics and values are not always reflected in our use of science and technology. So how do we keep science and technology in check? How do we use them as tools rather than allow them to have power over us and our way of life?

Does Symbolic Change Matter? The Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial on the National Mall

In the arena of social change, I am continually confronted with the question of to what extent symbolic change matters. Sometimes when we seek change that is partially or largely symbolic, we loose sight of the broader issue. For example, legalizing gay marriage doesn’t ensure equality for GLBT individuals and families, nor does a Supreme Court mandate to desegregate schools ensure that everyone has access to educational opportunities. Symbolic change has the potential to fundamentally change the ways in which we think and talk about social issues and it can empower us to keep working. At the same time, it can make us complacent because we feel good about having accomplished really very little.

Defining a Border Between Science and Religion

Implicit in any conversation about scientism, or its sibling religionism,ยน is an assumption of where the border between science and religion lies. Before I discuss these border crossings (in subsequent blog posts), I would like to propose a precise definition of where this border lies and its ideological consequences. Fortunately, the work of defining the respective roles of science and religion has already been done, and quite eloquently so, by Stephen Jay Gould, the late evolutionary biologist, in his book Rocks of Ages (1999) and in an online essay here. Professor Gould puts forward a model he calls non-overlapping magisteria, or NOMA, for the relationship that science and religion have had for much of their shared history, he argues, and ought to continue to have now. Science and religion, he posits, are non-overlapping domains of teaching authority, or magisteria.

Scientism Makes for Bad Science and Big Money: Complementary and Alternative Medicine as a Case Study

Complementary and alternative medicine, or CAM, which includes herbal medicine, chiropractic, acupuncture, Ayurveda, and traditional Chinese medicine, sits at the awkward intersection of medicine, spirituality, and tradition. Often touted for being antiestablishment, CAM is increasingly finding its way into the mainstream, through doctors’ offices, insurance companies, supplements, and the media. There’s even a division of the National Institutes of Health, the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM), devoted entirely to CAM. Established in the early 90s, NCCAM’s mission is to determine which CAM therapies are effective and why. Medical schools, funded by NCCAM and private philanthropists, are now offering classes in and have their own research facilities devoted to CAM.