ATTN NYC REASONOIDS: Ron Bailey Debates the Politics of Science Tonight

The Donald & Paula Smith Family Foundation

Present a debate

The Politics of Science:
Are politicians giving us the right prescriptions?

Featuring
Chris Mooney
Seed Magazine
Author: The Republican War on Science

Ronald Bailey
Reason Magazine
Author: Liberation Biology

Wesley J. Smith
Discovery Institute
Author: Consumer's Guide to A Brave New World

Moderator
Harvey Shapiro
Contributing Editor, Institutional Investor

From embryonic stem cell research to the fate of Terry Schiavo, science has given us a whole new set of political issues. Politicians are now compelled to have a position on everything from performance enhancing drugs in sports to global warming. In taking these positions, are politicians listening to the scientific community or are they responding to the interest groups essential to their election? Do politicians strike the right balance between the desire for progress and ethical implications of that progress? What role should elected officials and government play in encouraging desirable scientific research? Does science education accurately reflect the scientific consensus? Is science too important to be left to the scientists?

January 10, 2006
6:30 P.M. Prompt
(Free and open to the public - Reception to follow)

The Graduate Center
The City University of New York
365 Fifth Avenue, New York
(Corner of 34th Street & 5th Avenue)

RSVP by going here.

Comments

[Warren]

rah rah Ron
Yeaaaaaaaaaa Reason

go get em

[Bazil]

Us West Coast "reasonites" will be with you in spirit.

Let there be the light of reason.

[JD]

JD reporting back in from the event - I'm probably the first person back on line afterwards, because I had to run right afterwards. (I wouldn't be back on line anyway, except I'm supposed to be working. *eye-roll*)

I thought all the speakers were good, but Bailey was the pick of the litter, and I'm not just saying that because he's one of ours - his relaxed, slightly accented bass voice conveys a good kind of confidence. Mooney wasn't bad, but a little dry in an I'm-reading-from-a-prepared-text kind of way in the beginning. Smith was pretty good too, but a little strident at times.

Like people were saying here earlier, there wasn't any violent disagreement between the panelists, but there were enough differences to keep it interesting. Everyone did a fairly good job of expressing their views - though I wondered if Smith and Bailey both toned their views down a little for a general audience? The surprise of the evening for me was hearing Smith call himself a "Naderite" - I never would have guessed, and I have to give him credit for being reasoned in his thinking and presentation. (I may have to rethink my views on Naderites now, durn it.)

I wished that the first part of the panel had gone on longer, since there was definitely plenty more material to explore. I was pleased that most of the people who asked questions did so in timely fashion, and we didn't get the usual guy who only comes up to the mike to express his own views, takes five minutes talking, and then nobody can figure out what he was saying anyway.

The topic would have allowed for a much broader exploration; I think that the whole bioethics/science/government debate touches upon questions of where ethics come from to begin with, how they spread throughout society, and the differences between centralized and decentralized decision-making. The one thing I really wish any of the panelists had made a point of is that science is inherently about truth and knowledge and impartiality (in theory at least), whereas politics is inherently about compromise and power, which makes them odd bedfellows at best.

[Yakov Smirnov]

In Soviet Russia, Party RSVPs you.

[Sean Dougherty]

I also made it to the event last night and had similar observations. Ron was great - evenhanded but never giving an inch on his convictions or his points of fact.

Baily and Mooney definitely seemed more on top of the facts - they corrected Smith as well as questioners from the audience several times. Mooney tried to mask the fact this real problem is not government power to politicize science but that he doesn't like it when Republicans do it - which he basically failed at.

Smith was surprisingly contained and somewhat persuasive on the point of the inherent value of human life.

Sean Dougherty