- from the Excellent topical Choice for Bafutures desk of joschka fischer Greetings: OK...I ran across a wiki definition. Precautionary Principle: WikipediaMessage 1 of 21 , Jan 30, 2007View Sourcefrom the " Excellent topical Choice for Bafutures"
desk of joschka fischer
OK...I ran across a wiki definition.
Precautionary Principle: Wikipedia
Can you now show me some "real life" protagonists of
the principles such that:
a) they fall on political boundaries
b) it impedes science or it impedes technology (which
does it impede)
c) is the agenda to impede or get one's own
technology in he vanguard and make a profit. i.e. the
Japanese had 3G technology ready to go before Europe.
So Europe pass a bunch ao rules making 3G hard to
implement until EU finally caught up with the
d) Is Precautionary Principle an actual movement or
an "after the fact" polarizing scheme by
e) Regarding the wiki definition...what are the
loopholes to an Precautionary principles as an applied
f) Do the following books/articles refer to this
bludgeoning if not impeding science?
Interpreting the Precautionary Principle:
The Republican War against Science:
by Chris Mooney
How Science Make Political Controversies Worse:
by Daniel Sarewitz
Hiding Behind Science et other diatribes by Daniel
Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the
Erosion of American Democracy; With a new Afterword
by Jacob S. Hacker, Paul Pierson
but what are Science and Technology exactly and their
differences and how are they conducted?
Please don't say by the scientific method.
I've been working on this book for 3 months already
and ready for debate.
Book: Scientific Literacy and the myth of the
scientific method by Henry H. Bauer
How Institutions Think (Frank W. Abrams Lectures)
by Mary Douglas
Yea... I read too much but most non-homeless people
who can afford to go to college never read the right
things, if you ask me!
--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew@...> a
> On Jan 29, 2007, at 3:16 PM, Wayne Radinsky wrote:
> > Pardon me for asking another silly question, but
> why is the
> > Precautionary Principle "anti-science"?
> > Science is a process for testing hypothesises to
> see what is true
> > about the world. What does that have to do with
> the Precautionary
> > Principle?
> A fair point.
> The Precautionary Principle is not anti-science per
> se, but its
> practical consequence is that it slows or stops
> scientific progress
> by preventing the testing of hypotheses politically.
> This property
> of the Precautionary Principle is the primary reason
> its proponents
> promote it, as they see it as a means to their
> anti-science or anti-
> progress ends.
> I think a distinction can be made between those that
> are anti-science
> (primarily right-wing theocrats) and those that are
> (primarily miscellaneous left-wing factions). It is
> easy to lump
> them together because from some perspectives there
> is no practical
> difference in their desired outcomes, but they do
> have somewhat
> different motivations (though arguably grounded in
> the same kind of
> J. Andrew Rogers
Découvrez une nouvelle façon d'obtenir des réponses à toutes vos questions !
Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des expériences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/Réponses
- ... The Precautionary Principle is being used as the measuring methodology for which the conservative right is basing its assessment and judgement on emergentMessage 2 of 21 , Jan 31, 2007View SourceAt 07:43 PM 1/25/2007, Wayne wrote:
>Is this something like the "Precautionary Principle"? I once heard anThe Precautionary Principle is being used as the measuring methodology for
>hour-long debate about it, and at the end, I had absolutely no idea
>what the "Precautionary Principle" was.
which the conservative right is basing its assessment and judgement on
emergent technologies. It is an unbalanced measure because it
unequivocally places the burden of proof on the innovative technology to
prove itself approximately 100% successful in order for it to be supported
and employed into society. There is certainly a gray area herein, but most
importantly it is an unbalanced measure being "used" to stunt technological
A "balanced" measure designed to offer an alternative to this severe
measure is the "Proactionary Principle" which is designed to look at both
sides of the coin: (1) what could the technology do to advance, assist,
and improve conditions and (2) what are the potential for dangers of the
technology. Herein the assessment is to weight both sides and then to make
a decision as to whether the technology ought to be developed, supported
and employed by humanity/government/industry/individuals.
Because of emergent and the accelerating rate of technology and many
policy-makers being unfamiliar with technology, per se and generally how to
asses the future, this principle is immensely important to know about and
support (me thinks).
>It even occured to me that trying to follow "X Principle" isI don't think so. Rules and regulations are inflexible unless legal action
>impossible because no 2 people have the same concept of what X means
>in their brain. No?
is taken to adjust them, which takes time and money. It is far better to
develop literature and other means for people to learn about what is
happening in their world and how the rules and regulations are developed
and adhered to. In other words, If the policy-makers are biased about
progress and technologies it can and does hinder the growth and development
of society and its people. The Proactionary Principle addresses
this. Here is some literature. (Max has been writing a book on it.)
Design Media Artist - Futurist
Proactionary Principle Core Group, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy
Member, <http://www.profuturists.com/>Association of Professional Futurists
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle,
then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the
circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system
perspective. - Buckminster Fuller
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]