from page linked to image:
In a world where seemingly anything is possible, there are still lines of inquiry and research that—for a host of reasons—remain forbidden. Exploring restricted scientific and cultural topics in the face of social and moral constraints requires a willingness to buck the rules; to disobey them conscientiously. You don’t win a Nobel prize by doing what you’re told, but there is a fuzzy line—sometimes obvious only in retrospect—between disobedience that helps society and disobedience that doesn’t.
The idea of “forbidden research” challenges us to ..
question long-standing laws and rules about what knowledge we can seek,
and whether that knowledge improves or impedes the health and sustainability of society. Deeply held moral beliefs have led to laws that restrict research on organismal engineering. Artificial intelligence and machine rights raise uncomfortable social, cultural, and legal questions. Misconceptions about Islam and women’s rights are amplified around the world, especially now in a time of politically charged racism in America. Climate and environmental engineering offer massive potential and massive risk. Can we afford to take those risks? Can we afford not to?
If you have any questions, or ideas for Forbidden Research-related topics, please email firstname.lastname@example.org.
‘how to protect freedom to take on new research.. forbidden because so big/uncomfortable’ – @
‘restrictions on what we can study are restrictions on an open society’ – @
on denialism & non-solutions that arise & the silencing people that discover the flaws- @
‘tiny compromises..got us to net we have today. ulysses pacts’- @
‘laws are actually a weak guarantee of outcome’ – @
‘law is not a substitute for conscience’ – @
‘one good journalist at right time/place can change history.. makes them targets’- @
day of.. via livestream:
Evolution doesn’t optimize for well-being. Should we do that? Could we even know how? A public, not scientist question 403 #