Lecellier Charles-Henri
Institut de génétique moléculaire de Montpellier, CNRS UMR 5535-IFR 122, 1919, route de Mende, 34293 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.
Med Sci (Paris). 2011 Apr;27(4):433-8. doi: 10.1051/medsci/2011274021. Epub 2011 Apr 28.
Suspicion towards technological advances has progressively grown during the xx(th) century. However, in the XXI(st) century, reading the NBIC (nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science) report of the National Science Foundation, we can note that science has caught up with science fiction. These changes in public mentality on one side and in scientific capacities on the other argue for an evolution of the debate on sciences. The recent example of the national debate on nanotechnology in France has clearly shown that the public is no longer waiting for additional sources of scientific knowledge but rather waiting for the recognition of its authority to participate in the definition of the national R&D priority and associated scientific strategies. This is all the more legitimate that these strategies will have profound impact on the future of our societies and therefore cannot be decided only by scientists. Hence, it is crucial to identify innovative tools promoting debate on sciences and their technological spin-off. Here, we contend that science fiction has major assets that could face this challenge and facilitate the dialogue between sciences and society.
在20世纪,对技术进步的怀疑逐渐加剧。然而,在21世纪,阅读美国国家科学基金会的NBIC(纳米技术、生物技术、信息技术和认知科学)报告时,我们会注意到科学已经赶上了科幻小说。公众心态的这些变化以及科学能力的变化都表明关于科学的辩论需要演变。法国最近关于纳米技术的全国性辩论就是一个明显的例子,它表明公众不再等待更多的科学知识来源,而是等待其参与国家研发优先事项及相关科学战略定义的权威得到认可。这些战略将对我们社会的未来产生深远影响,因此不能仅由科学家来决定,这一点愈发合理。因此,确定促进科学及其技术衍生产品辩论的创新工具至关重要。在此,我们认为科幻小说具备应对这一挑战并促进科学与社会对话的重要资产。