The Pumpkin or the Tiger? Michael Polanyi, Frederick Soddy, and Anticipating Emerging Technologies.

IF 3.2 2区 哲学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Minerva Pub Date : 2012-09-01 Epub Date: 2012-09-06 DOI:10.1007/s11024-012-9204-8
David H Guston
{"title":"The Pumpkin or the Tiger? Michael Polanyi, Frederick Soddy, and Anticipating Emerging Technologies.","authors":"David H Guston","doi":"10.1007/s11024-012-9204-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Imagine putting together a jigsaw puzzle that works like the board game in the movie \"Jumanji\": When you finish, whatever the puzzle portrays becomes real. The children playing \"Jumanji\" learn to prepare for the reality that emerges from the next throw of the dice. But how would this work for the puzzle of scientific research? How do you prepare for unlocking the secrets of the atom, or assembling from the bottom-up nanotechnologies with unforeseen properties - especially when completion of such puzzles lies decades after the first scattered pieces are tentatively assembled? In the inaugural issue of this journal, Michael Polanyi argued that because the progress of science is unpredictable, society must only move forward with solving the puzzle until the picture completes itself. Decades earlier, Frederick Soddy argued that once the potential for danger reveals itself, one must reorient the whole of one's work to avoid it. While both scientists stake out extreme positions, Soddy's approach - together with the action taken by the like-minded Leo Szilard - provides a foundation for the anticipatory governance of emerging technologies. This paper narrates the intertwining stories of Polanyi, Soddy and Szilard, revealing how anticipation influenced governance in the case of atomic weapons and how Polanyi's claim in \"The Republic of Science\" of an unpredictable and hence ungovernable science is faulty on multiple levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":47427,"journal":{"name":"Minerva","volume":"50 3","pages":"363-379"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11024-012-9204-8","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-012-9204-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/9/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

Imagine putting together a jigsaw puzzle that works like the board game in the movie "Jumanji": When you finish, whatever the puzzle portrays becomes real. The children playing "Jumanji" learn to prepare for the reality that emerges from the next throw of the dice. But how would this work for the puzzle of scientific research? How do you prepare for unlocking the secrets of the atom, or assembling from the bottom-up nanotechnologies with unforeseen properties - especially when completion of such puzzles lies decades after the first scattered pieces are tentatively assembled? In the inaugural issue of this journal, Michael Polanyi argued that because the progress of science is unpredictable, society must only move forward with solving the puzzle until the picture completes itself. Decades earlier, Frederick Soddy argued that once the potential for danger reveals itself, one must reorient the whole of one's work to avoid it. While both scientists stake out extreme positions, Soddy's approach - together with the action taken by the like-minded Leo Szilard - provides a foundation for the anticipatory governance of emerging technologies. This paper narrates the intertwining stories of Polanyi, Soddy and Szilard, revealing how anticipation influenced governance in the case of atomic weapons and how Polanyi's claim in "The Republic of Science" of an unpredictable and hence ungovernable science is faulty on multiple levels.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
南瓜还是老虎?Michael Polanyi, Frederick Soddy和预测新兴技术。
想象一下,把一个像电影《勇敢者》(Jumanji)中的棋盘游戏一样的拼图拼在一起:当你完成后,拼图所描绘的一切都变成了现实。玩“勇敢者”的孩子们学会了为下一次掷骰子时出现的现实做准备。但这对科学研究的难题有什么作用呢?你如何准备解开原子的秘密,或从下而上组装具有不可预见性质的纳米技术——特别是当这些谜题在第一批零散的碎片初步组装后几十年才完成时?在本刊的创刊号中,迈克尔·波兰尼(Michael Polanyi)认为,因为科学的进步是不可预测的,所以社会只能向前推进,解决这个谜题,直到图景自己完成。几十年前,弗雷德里克·索迪(Frederick Soddy)认为,一旦潜在的危险暴露出来,人们必须重新调整自己的整个工作方向,以避免这种危险。虽然两位科学家都持极端立场,但Soddy的方法——以及志同道合的Leo Szilard采取的行动——为新兴技术的预期治理提供了基础。本文叙述了波兰尼、索迪和西拉德的相互交织的故事,揭示了在原子武器的情况下,预期是如何影响治理的,以及波兰尼在《科学共和国》中关于不可预测因而无法治理的科学的主张在多个层面上是错误的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva
Minerva Multiple-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Minerva is devoted to the study of ideas, traditions, cultures and institutions in science, higher education and research. It is concerned no less with history than with present practice, and with the local as well as the global. It speaks to the scholar, the teacher, the policy-maker and the administrator. It features articles, essay reviews and ''special'' issues on themes of topical importance. It represents no single school of thought, but welcomes diversity, within the rules of rational discourse. Its contributions are peer-reviewed. Its audience is world-wide.
期刊最新文献
The EUropeanisation of Research Infrastructure Policy Between Delivery and Luck: Projectification of Academic Careers and Conflicting Notions of Worth at the Postdoc Level Benchmarking and the Technicization of Academic Discourse: The Case of the EU at-Risk of Poverty or Social Exclusion Composite Indicator Strategic Bureaucracy: The Convergence of Bureaucratic and Strategic Management Logics in the Organizational Restructuring of Universities The Therapeutic University
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1