NobelPrize.org Photo
Frederick Soddy.
(NHI Nanoblog) As researchers, manufacturers and policymakers wrestle with how to handle the risks and benefits of the brave new world of nanotechnology, David Guston wants them to step back into history — to the beginning of the atomic age and the insights of two long-dead science philosophers.
In a lecture last week at Yale, Guston invoked Frederick Soddy and Michael Polanyi—two men with very different views about the philosophy of science.
Guston, a political science professor, directs the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University. Since his days as a Yale undergraduate, he’s been exploring the implications of technology for how we live and how we interact with each other and our environment.
Nanotechnology leverages ultra-tiny particles (a nanometer is a billionth of a meter) to create super-products. These materials can make bike frames lighter and stronger and sunscreen more transparent on the skin, as well as new medical instruments and medicines that can save lives. Because of its promise, nano is hot field in emerging technologies.
But shrinking these substances can change their properties. Scientists and regulators are struggling to figure out whether, how and why that shift can make them dangerous in the process.
Like others in the nano world, Guston sees the idea of “anticipatory governance” as a way to ponder the risk vs. benefit equation in the absence of hard-and-fast regulations of these materials and substances. Unlike the approach known as the “precautionary principle,” which advocates for waiting to produce something until it’s known to be safe, anticipatory governance is more about laying the groundwork for safety by identifying potential risks and managing them, while still proceeding with development in a careful way.
Enter the insights of yesterday’s scientists.
Polanyi, who began his career in physical chemistry but became a major force in the philosophy of science, argued that because one can’t predict where science will go, it’s “impossible and nonsensical” to attempt to guess the social impact, Guston said during his lecture. Soddy, who won a Nobel Prize for his theory of isotopes but drifted away from the field of radioactivity, saw that type of thinking ahead as an imperative for scientists, Guston said.
He compared the two men’s thinking about the implications of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which led, indirectly, to the development of the atomic bomb. Soddy, Guston said, seemed to contemplate the ability to harness the energy inside of an atom very early on, including the negative uses of that energy.
In contrast, Guston said, when Polanyi was asked in early 1945 — mere months before the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki — about the practical implications of Einstein’s theory, he had no answer. That suggests that Polanyi hadn’t made the connection between relativity and atomic science, Guston said.
Gwyneth K. Shaw Photo
David Guston, left, discussing his work at Yale.
The question for our times, Guston said, is which way scientists are thinking about all kinds of emerging technologies, from nanomaterials to bioengineered plants.
“Are scientists today capable of fulfilling those duties?” he asked.
The key principles that the ASU center adheres to, Guston said, are foresight, engagement and integration. In practice, that means forward-thinking research; direct interaction with and education of the public about new technologies; and turning out policymakers who understand science — and vice versa.
The evaluation of risks and benefits can’t be done just when a product using nanomaterials is ready to go to market, Guston said. It’s important for those debates to happen “upstream” in the development process, “before the decisions are being made in the lab.”
Guston compared this task to a puzzle: the difficult part is sussing out the full picture while most of the pieces remain face-down.
With nanomaterials, lots of the puzzle remains hidden — and how well people like Guston are able to understand the partial picture is crucial to the safe development of these innovations.