TNTlog

Well, if you're going to ask for a partnership with, or handout from, Bono, you might want to tone down the anti-religious rhetoric. Bono's not only into nano, but he's a card-carrying Christian who treads dangerously into MadonnaKabbalah territory when he refers to "A force of love and logic behind the universe."

I can't believe the news today, I can't close my eyes and make it go away ...

HL

Howard,

We’re baffled as to how you equate our comments on Madonna’s astrologist with anti-religious rhetoric. Regurgitating that kind of cosmic garbage is worthy of being flagged as twaddle, whether it comes from Archbishop Harper or Ayatollah Lovy.

All is not lost, blogspace is full of places dedicated to the discussion of the finer aspects of spirituality and science.

This isn't one of them.

Well, you were a target of opportunity for me. I think you're intelligent enough to know that I'm not defending "astrology" and that I really don't care what Madonna is in to (Kabbalah is old news, by the way. I heard about her interest in it about six years ago and attempted to interview her about it for her hometown newspaper, The Detroit News, and was rebuffed by her publicist).

The larger point here is that you cannot divorce science from larger issues of society, culture, religion, custom and, yes, superstition. You can say you're all about pure science -- it either is or it ain't -- and to hell with the unwashed masses and their silly unscientific superstitions, and you're going to find yourself completely baffled as to why the public just can't see the logic in your arguments for nanotechnology.

Nanotech, as you know, is not any one technology at all, but promises to become pervasive in just about all aspects of life. Therefore, it needs to be presented to the public differently. It needs to be presented within a broader context. Otherwise, you'll be met with GMO-style opposition. As you know, GMO is a case where misconception and superstition had a real impact on the science and technology that you care very much about.

It's not about Madonna. It's not about Kabbalah. I just saw some inacuracies in your coverage of this and wanted to set it straight. Then, I grew annoyed at the pompous tone you took -- a tone that I think resonates negatively with the general public. So, I used it to try and make this larger point. Nanotechnology is not only about science and business. It's also very much about society and culture. If you want public acceptance, you have to concern yourself with all of the above.

Howard

I'm sorry, you just can't be serious.

Can you accept that you have no evidence for your beliefs? If you so, then why believe in them at all? Does it makes you feel better? Does it make you feel there is some logical reason to personal tragedies and suffering in the rest of the world?

Howard, the universe doesn't love or hate us and it doesn't feel malice or benevolence towards us.

Where did you read that I believe in any of the things you describe above? Not very scientific, my friend, to jump to conclusions without first investigating.

My larger point, though: It makes no difference what I believe. It makes every bit of difference for nanoscientists to connect with the public and be aware of what it is they believe and hold dear.

HL

What things did I imply that you believe?

Science is about repeatable control of rationalized processes. Mysticism is about human mind and feeling re the ineffable, the Presence of the Godhead. Mysticism without science is lame, science without some additional spiritual input is morally neutral, to paraphrase Einstein's aphorism. Perhaps, Confucian values or the 10 Commandments or the Sermon on the Mount offer a middle, common ground. Would suggest "The Masters and Their Retreats" and "The Soulless One," by Mark L. Prophet, "Hope for the World: Spiritual Galvanoplasty," by O. M. Aivanhov, and "The Path of Virtue," by Jonathan Murro, as interesting reading along those middle-ground regions.