|
Current Issue Contents | Past Issues | Subscribe | Contact | Terasem Journals Home |
||
|
Volume 1, Issue 2 Other Terasem Journals |
Proactionary Nano-Policy: Managing Massive Decisions for Tiny TechnologiesMax More, Ph.D.page 5 of 7 The following list summarizes the ways in which the precautionary principle fails:
The precautionary principle denies us the freedom to make trade-offs. This relates to the point made earlier about poorer countries that may need to have different priorities in terms of trading off some of the health of their environment for more economic development at their stage, just as we did decades ago. It does not allow for those kinds of trade-offs because it puts an absolute value on caution. With regards to the point that it favors nature over humanity, it does not explicitly do that, but does so in the way it is actually deployed. People who use the precautionary principle often tend to be perceived as anti-civilization, anti-progress, and anti-science. They do not apply the principle to nature itself, but rather always to human-made technology or policy. It is not applied to natural viruses, bacteria, floods, and hurricanes. It does not ponder the costs and benefits of nature, but assumes that nature is innocent. It is a throw back to that old view of nature as perfect and innocent, quite the contrary of nature living tooth and claw. The Proactionary Principle “Freedom to innovate technologically is highly valuable, even critical, to humanity. This implies a range of responsibilities for those considering whether and how to develop, deploy, or restrict new technologies. Assess risks and opportunities using an objective, open and comprehensive, yet simple decision process based on science rather than collective emotional reactions. Account for the costs of restrictions and lost opportunities as fully as direct effects. Favor measures that are proportionate to the probability and magnitude of impacts, and that have the highest payoff relative to their costs. Give a high priority to people’s freedom to learn, innovate, and advance.” The basic point of the proactionary principle is that we need to protect the freedom to innovate because it is critical to our future survival and well-being. We cannot assume that because we are comfortable now, we always will be. New threats, both natural ones and ones created by other human beings in various places, constantly arise. At the same time, we do need to consider risks very carefully. Even if we are going to go ahead with the technology, there are better and worse ways of going ahead with it. There are better and worse ways of testing it, and of planning for contingencies. We need to look at all the different ways - not only whether you go or not go, but which way should we go? We must also ask - to the extent that we do need to apply any kinds of restrictions, whether self-regulation or government regulation, what is the cost of those restrictions and how can we minimize it? How can we get the most benefit from any kind of restriction we do impose? <previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next page> |
The Terasem Pledge We pledge allegiance to the flag of the collective consciousness of Terasem, and to the principles for which it stands, education, persistently, with diversity, unity, and joyful immortality everywhere.
|
|
TerasemJournal.com Home | Journal of Geoethical Nanotechnology | Journal of Personal Cyberconsciousness Copyright 2006, Terasem Movement. Disclaimer |
||
