Orpilla, Geo T.
Science, Technology, and Society
MRR 1
The Medawar Lecture 1998
Is Science Dangerous?
Lewis Wolpert
The given reading material gave me a new and better perspective with regards to the current issues in the
field of science and technology. It discusses the dangers of science and technology once it is irresponsibly handled
but also emphasizes why we should take the risk and continue studying science. Below are the things that I have
learned or realized upon reading the material.
The reading introduced me to Eugenics. This was the first time I encountered such term, and what does it
mean. It made me sad knowing that Eugenics back in the old times is made up of twisted scientists who aim to
prevent the spread of negative genes by eliminating or casting out those who contain such. Moreover, they
declared a huge number of undesirable characteristics which they think are genetically determined. However, I felt
relief when I also read in the material that modern day Eugenics now aims to prevent and cure those with genetic
disabilities, and I believe that they have also modified their perception and definition of the traits which is totally
different from that of the previous version of Eugenics.
Finally, this paragraph would contain the main lesson that I learned from the reading, is that science is
indeed really dangerous. The author did not deny the fact that science is dangerous, but Wolpert included in his
work why we should still continue studying and expanding our knowledge in science and technology despite the
dangers, and that has something to do with the role of media, politics, and the scientists themselves. Whenever I
hear the words “genetic engineering” and “cloning,” the first thing that comes into my mind is that it is
controversial, and it is illegal in the sense that it violates moral and social codes. However, the article stated that in
vitro fertilization (IVF) which is morally accepted, is identical to the two words I stated above which most of us
considers it immoral. Where did we get such impression that therapeutic cloning and such are unethical, when IVF
can be argued as less ethical according to the author? Here is where the role of the media and politicians are
emphasized. The media and politicians shape the minds of the public, the society. When they label something as
morally unacceptable, then most members of the society would probably agree to such statement, since they have
the power to persuade people into accepting such belief. If they were just to think more critically, to set aside their
biases, and to let themselves enlightened by the scientists themselves with regards to the said study, then they
would’ve properly enlightened as well the public, preventing unnecessary negative impressions in such critical or
controversial fields. As for the scientists, they should be responsible with their studies and not to use it to do harm.
It is written in the material that they should not only decide for themselves, but instead they should include the
public in making decisions. I agree to Wolpert when he stated, “We have to rely on the many institutions of a
democratic society: parliament, a free and vigorous press, affected groups and the scientists themselves.” To have
a healthy discussion with regards the pressing issues in the field of science and to include the public in decision
making, we must follow what Wolpert stated above. If we fail to have a healthy discussion and continue tagging
negative impressions on discoveries and knowledge without critically thinking about it, then maybe in time the
field of science will stagnate, bounded by the chains of unproven and hasty accusations, wasting the opportunities
that could possibly improve our way of living or save the lives of others, failing to solve problems that arise, which
could worsen our condition. I strongly agree when Wolpert said, “One should not abandon the possibility of doing
good by applying some scientific idea because one can also use it to do bad.” All we need is to be responsible and
mindful of our actions, and take the opportunity to study science as well the dangers posed before us. Yes, science
is dangerous IF it is being entrusted on the wrong, irresponsible hands, and IF it is being projected and perceived
falsely.
