Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Intellectual Sleaze (Long) Message-ID: <1686@dciem.UUCP> Date: Fri, 20-Sep-85 18:00:00 EDT Article-I.D.: dciem.1686 Posted: Fri Sep 20 18:00:00 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 20-Sep-85 20:08:34 EDT References: <1386@utcsri.UUCP> <5952@utzoo.UUCP> <820@water.UUCP> <12@ubc-cs.UUCP> Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada Lines: 41 Summary: Why does Rick Morrison assume that people in favour of nuclear power are opposed to doing anything about acid rain? It seems illogical on the face of it to make that assumption, because any closure of a power-plant generating sulphates would help to decrease acid rain. It is more illogical when you consider that we (in this discussion) who support nuclear power do so on the presumption that it is the cleanest power source we now have available. I note, however, that Rick opposes using technical data for discussing technical questions. Perhaps the logic of this is consistent with that of his thinking on the relation between support of nuclear power and unwillingness to do anything but study acid rain. >We choose to think of empirically well-established scientific theory >as fact. Merely repeating TECHNICAL OPINION about the benefits >of one form of technology or another, whether in technical >journals or on the network news does not make it fact. Adopting >it as such is what I consider INTELLECTUAL SLEAZE. > >My ONLY HARD CLAIM is that our lack of understanding of a >technology which has the potential for extreme hazard calls for >great caution - caution that is not now being exercised. >To continue to promulgate TECHNICAL DOGMA in the guise of >scientific fact does nothing for reasoned debate about technical >issues. Note: "Scientific fact" does not exist. TECHNICAL DOGMA is normally known as engineering experience, and is based on our best knowledge of how things really work in practice. Technical knowledge presumably becomes dogma when it disagrees with preconceived opinions. We all (I hope) know that there are no certainties in this problem. We all (I hope) know that we are in an extremely dangerous situation regardless of which course we follow. Some of us believe that the course of best hope is the nuclear course, because the alternatives are worse, not because nuclear power is ideal and perfectly safe. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt