Visit our website
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
MIT Technology Review
MIT Technology Review
io9
io9
Techdirt
Techdirt
Knowledge@Wharton
Knowledge@Wharton
Bioscience Technology
Bioscience Technology
redOrbit
redOrbit
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Popular Science Blog
Popular Science Blog
Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center
Genomics Law Report
Genomics Law Report
Science 2.0
Science 2.0
The Guardian Headquarters
The Guardian Headquarters
Genetic Literacy Project
Genetic Literacy Project
Disclaimer

Statements posted on this blog represent the views of individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for Law Science & Innovation (which does not take positions on policy issues) or of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law or Arizona State University.

Worldwide Web Watch

WWWapril15August 5, 2015

Harvard’s Steven Pinker is telling the worrywarts to stop worrying so much and to “get out of the way” of biomedical research and developments that have the ability to benefit quality of life — and life in general.  In The moral imperative for bioethics, Pinker writes, “[a] truly ethical bioethics should not bog down research in red tape, … [n]or should it thwart research that has likely benefits now or in the near future by sowing panic about speculative harms in the distant future.”  In essence, the only thing we can know about the future is what seems like a good thing now may turn out to be not so great and what is feared as bad or with extreme caution, may be the next success story.   Pinker suggests easing up on unsubstantiated precautionary measures and taking a ride on what some view mistakenly as “a runaway train” to experience the remarkable benefits its journey may reveal along the way.