Michael Crichton, Mad Science, Scientist discussed on The Pulse
Over the course of time, we've used the name Frankenstein, even though Frankenstein was not the actual Munster to denote some wrongdoing and science where some perceive wrongdoing and science Michael says, the mad scientist motive is in part, a creation of the writer's imagination. But it also reflects things that people were worried about at the time. If you look the island of Dr oh, for example, I believe is publishing the t nine is it relates to concerns about vivisection that's operating on live animals. You go back to the compound Dugway. And about Evelyn theory, which very new to the world particular time when Darwin's ideas were spreading beyond the scientific domain into the social domain. We see it later in the nineteen fifties and sixties reflecting fears about nuclear technology, and there's some fantastic movies from those times about. Killer ants that were exposed to atomic radiation, swirling, inferno of radioactive dust where things are so terrifying. So hideous carrier snow way to despite them. And of course, there's the whole canon of Michael Crichton from the Andromeda strain to Westworld and Jurassic Park. Michael Crichton made a career out of examining trust of science. He was constantly exploring. This idea of the mad scientist and the way in which at least in his calculation. Scientists would always push past the boundaries of what most society would think of as acceptable science. Whether it be bringing back, you know, satellite from outer space that contained a deadly pathogen or whether it be recreating dinosaurs. So how to scientists feel about this Trump real scientists get accused of being mad scientists all the time Craig Venter who was one of the genomic scientists to I sequence the human genome and later went on to create the first thank life-form has been accused of being a mad scientist. I think that's pretty ridiculous. But you can see where that comes from comes from fear and concern over what individuals were could potentially lead to. And Michael says, we have to be careful not to confuse mad science in movies with bad science in real light. It relates to bed study design it relates to the way in which scientists perceive of and treat their study subjects often unethically, and I think it relates to what scientists always bring to the table, but perhaps bring more of it to the table in the context of bad science, and that is. Nixing their own personal ideologies with the scientific methodology which isn't perfect on its own. But those two things together can create a real harm. Michael says there are lots of historic examples of bad science and science isn't perfect now, either sometimes scientists get it, right? And sometimes they get it wrong. And we do our best through ethics regulations to help them. Not get it wrong. But scientists are people too, and that's part of the practice volition of science. Tell my students that when we look at some of the agreed ethical examples from the history Pollock health history medicine over the course of the twentieth century that for sure century from now people look back and say, you know, we did certain things wrong, and we harmed people's and populations in variety of different ways. Michael you Dell is a historian of public health and an ethicist at Drexel University. That's our show for this week. The pulses a production of WHYY in Philadelphia. Our health and science reporters are Alan you, Liz tongue and jets Sulaiman Julian Harris is our intern. Charlie Kyler is our engineer and this week we had engineering help from Adam Stanishev chessy Lindsey Lazar scales. Our producer, Tanya English is our editorial director, I Mike and Scott. Thank you for listening. Behavioral health reporting.