If Science is to Save Us
-
- ¥1,900
Publisher Description
There has never been a time when ‘following the science’ has been more important for humanity. At no other point in history have we had such advanced knowledge and technology at our fingertips, nor had such astonishing capacity to determine the future of our planet.
But the decisions we must make on how science is applied belong outside the lab and should be the outcome of wide public debate. For that to happen, science needs to become part of our common culture. Science is not just for scientists: if it were, it could never save us from the multiple crises we face. For science can save us, if its innovations mesh carefully into society and its applications are channelled for the common good.
As Martin Rees argues in this expert and personal analysis of the scientific endeavour on which we all depend, we need to think globally, we need to think rationally and we need to think long-term, empowered by twenty-first-century technology but guided by values that science alone cannot provide.
Also available as an audiobook.
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
Understanding science is crucial for the future of humanity, writes astrophysicist Rees (On the Future: Prospects for Humanity) in this solid treatise. Rees opens by identifying three "interlinked mega-challenges" humanity will face in the very near future: providing enough food and energy for a growing population while avoiding further damage to the climate; facing the "ethical conundrums" posed by biotechnology; and enabling artificial intelligence to "transform our economy and our society, despite vulnerability to malfunctions." More bluntly, "the whole future of our species depends" upon science being deployed "for social benefit," Rees argues, and, as such, scientists must play a part in public policy and experts should be "embedded in the government at a high level." To that end, Rees examines how to get "the best from science," contending that, among other things, the field "needs ambitious and stable funding" and K–12 teachers should be paid higher salaries. Ultimately, Rees writes, "we need a scientifically aware public energized and inspired by charismatic campaigners." His reasoning is sensible and down-to-earth, and the call for change refreshingly urgent instead of doom and gloom. The result is a convincing study on why "science isn't just for scientists."
