Blurring Our Edges
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NATURE|Vol 450|15 November 2007 BOOKS & ARTS not involve passing on truths from producer rigorous understanding of whose technical between colour perceivers and colour-blind to consumer, but takes the form of fallible expertise really should weigh in on techno- participants, probably because the latter had judgements made in situations in which all logical decision-making. This is what Collins been immersed since birth in the language of the desired information is not available. This and Evans call the “problem of extension”, or colour and acquired the ability to pass as per- applies to scientific collaborations and gov- “who is entitled to contribute to the technical ceivers. In another, judges could not pick out ernmental projects. “The speed of politics,” component of a technological decision”. If an Collins in a group of bona fide gravitational- they write in a characteristically succinct and extension is too technocratic, it will foster dis- wave researchers. clever remark, “exceeds the speed of scientific trust; if it is too broad, there is a risk of invoking These results have startling implications. consensus formation.” This leads them to ‘technological populism’, which means deci- For instance, Evans has shown that minorities defend their seemingly pedestrian conclusion sions could be overly influenced by politics or can acquire enough interactional expertise of that governments should rely on experts as lifestyle choice. mainstream culture to foil attempts to pick “the best way to distil human experience of an The authors address the problem of exten- them out by questioning alone. This suggests uncertain world” — even when those experts sion by offering a “periodic table of expertise” that if minorities live by different values, it is have no final answers. — an attempt “to classify all the types of exper- not through ignorance but choice. The authors needed to defend themselves. tise that might be brought to bear on a techno- Collins and Evans put their points vividly, Some sociologists sharply attacked their 2002 logical problem”. These include about a dozen with elegant language and diagrams. They article on the grounds that the technical and varieties, ranging from language-speaking skills admit that there is more to technological deci- political phases of a controversy cannot be to higher, domain-restricted categories. There is sion-making than “sorting out the appropri- neatly separated, and that governments often ‘contributory’ expertise from active practition- ate groups of experts” and that they are only use expert advice on technical questions (“Does ers of a field (the usual concept of an expert) and addressing the technical phase of public con- activity X meet our standards for safety?”) to ‘interactional’ expertise, which involves fluency troversies. They modestly claim to be only set- disguise political questions (“Should we do in a field in the absence of contribution. Sociol- ting “the ball rolling”. activity X?”). This problem is best met, critics ogists and journalists have interactional exper- Their book starts to lay the groundwork for contended, by expanding public involvement tise, and it is widespread in science (in which solving a critical problem — how to restore the in technological decision-making, breaking scientists must interact across disciplines), in force of technical scientific information in pub- down the boundaries between experts and management and in peer-reviewing. lic controversies, without importing disguised laypeople. Interactional expertise is one of the authors’ political agendas. ■ Rethinking Expertise argues the reverse, most novel ideas. They dramatize it by report- Robert P. Crease is a professor in and chairman namely that disguised political questions ing the results of several Turing-test-like imita- of the Department of Philosophy, Stony Brook would be combated more effectively by a more tion games. In one, judges could not distinguish University, New York 11794, USA. Blurring our edges Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People by John Harris Princeton University Press: 2007. 260 pp. $27.95, £16.95 Ending Aging: The Rejuvenation Breakthroughs That Could Reverse Human Aging in Our Lifetime by Aubrey de Grey and Michael Rae St. Martin’s Press: 2007. 400 pp. $26.95 Judy Illes Two new books explore the potential for improving the human condition, one from a medical-ethics viewpoint and the other from a more hands-on biogerontological perspective. Each identifies physical health and cognition as the key areas for attention in the short term, and each speculates on future possibilities for life extension — going well beyond what might be imaginable, or ethical, today. John Harris’s book Enhancing Evolution dis- cusses the future of humankind and of research, and looks at issues such as reproductive choice, designer children and disability. Harris system- atically analyses historical and contemporary writings to support his central claim that the pursuit of methods to enhance the human condition is a moral obligation. His treatment PHOTO NEWS/AP KYODO of opinions by conservative thinkers and phi- Could we all live longer than Japan’s Yone Minagawa, who reached her 114th birthday? 351 BOOKS & ARTS NATURE|Vol 450|15 November 2007 losophers such as Leon Kass, Jürgen Habermas life-prolonging intervention — reconfiguring perhaps will find some traction among those and Francis Fukuyama is at times abrasive. But, the term ‘life sentence’ and introducing new who are more curious than interested in deeper whether or not one agrees with Harris’s posi- systems of justice for the parallel mortal and scientific engagement. I end unconvinced by tion, he dissects their opposing claims with immortal populations? Harris’s view, but my interest was piqued by impressive effectiveness. He makes a persuasive Will people be able to step off the immor- the diverse ways in which physical and mental case that today’s biotechnologies — including tality train when they are ready? Will suicide health, autonomy, culture, and respectful and neuroengineering, stem-cell research and clon- increase if we move life expectancy into the caring community systems can be realized. ing to improve bodies and brains — are on the hundreds? We cannot remove longevity like After we have maximized human well-being continuum of an age-long pursuit by humans a pair of spectacles. And abuse is reported by and compressed morbidity to minimize suf- to improve themselves and therefore, he argues, 1–10% of old people surveyed, mostly directed fering (see A. Kalache et al. Bull. World Health are permissible and morally essential. against women. If society shows increasingly Organ. 80, 243–244; 2002), then let’s think I question the author’s contention that scant regard for centenarians, how will it treat about life extension, step-by-step, one decade choices such as non-medical sex selection can people of 1,000 years old? at a time. ■ be as straightforward as picking a white shirt Let’s not throw away today for tomor- Judy Illes is professor of neurology at the over a Hawaiian one, or that “inevitability is row. Ending Aging is likely to appeal to those National Core of Neuroethics, University of the only reason dying of old age is acceptable”. already converted to the authors’ views, and British Columbia, Vancouver V6T 2B5, Canada. But I do agree that everyone — scientists, ethi- cists and the public — has a role in the research enterprise, not least because of benefit sharing. That is not to say that we should all be drafted Archimedes’ secrets revealed into research, and certainly no end would jus- tify exploitation of children and people with diminished abilities, but service to society by The Archimedes Codex codex, had never been fully deciphered. Access its members is an honourable goal. by Reviel Netz & William Noel to the earliest known version (from the tenth Aubrey de Grey and Michael Rae’s End- Weidenfeld & Nicolson/Phoenix/ century) was important because of a recent shift ing Aging is a more ‘new-wave’ treatment of Da Capo Press: 2007. 336/336/320 pp. in interpretation of Greek texts. The Greeks enhancement, longevity and immortality. £18.99 (hbk)/£8.99/$27.50 (pbk) approached mathematics visually. The diagrams Through chapters with catchy titles, such as and the exact wording used are crucial in under- ‘Putting Zombies to Rest’, and gripping lan- Brian Clegg standing the thinking of a Greek mathematician guage — “I shall look forward to shaking your In April 2004, biologist Lewis Wolpert won — yet when the lost Archimedes manuscripts hand in a future where engineered senescence a debate at the Royal Institution in London were transcribed, no thought was given to cap- is a reality” — the authors call for research that entitled ‘Who was the first scientist?’ He turing the visual nature of the information. will deliver a life expectancy to match that of championed Archimedes. Although I reckon In The Archimedes Codex, Reviel Netz and Methuselah, the oldest of the people whose age Roger Bacon comes closer to deserving that William Noel contribute alternate chapters, (969 years) is mentioned in The Bible. label, the result reflects the respect still felt with Noel describing the history of the codex Ending Aging guides the reader through a for Archimedes’ work. Yet our knowledge and the work undertaken to decipher it, and maze of advances in molecular and cellular of his output has never been complete. The Netz exploring Archimedes’ mathematics. biology that could lead to anti-ageing therapies, Archimedes Codex describes the recent uncov- This discontinuous style is initially unnerving which the authors term SENS (for ‘strategies ering of text from the Archimedes canon not — both authors write in the first person, and it for negligible senescence’). The targets are a read since the parchment forming the codex isn’t clear that the ‘I’ of chapter 1 is not the same range of cancer-causing nuclear and mitochon- was reused to make a prayer book in 1229.