Direction for [ Question No: 11 To 16 ] :
Read the following passage and answer the questions below :
There is a true schism between Science and society. They form, so-to-say, two disparate worlds. On the one hand, there is society claiming that science is responsible for most of the evil on earth, having caused all the pollution, (like Bhopal, Seveso, and Chernobyl), a society that is nevertheless thoughtlessly using and misusing all the goodies of science and technology. On the other hand, there are many of our great scientists who still think in terms of unlimited progress on a technological level. They are convinced that progress of mankind is measured, apart from achievements in cosmic knowledge, in extension of life-span of human beings, genetically modifying human species and so on.
Is it really a meaningful goal to further improve the living standards of affluent minority and extend their individual life span ? Would it not be better to attempt to extend the life span of the entire mankind on earth ? If we do not think long term, nature will find its own ways to set limits : ‘Eat and be extent’. If we do not think for ahead, our descendants will have to experience the fatal limits without being properly prepared.
Who should, then, care about the far future ? This leads us to the question of sustainability. Sustainable development is today a well accepted conversation piece in any upper class society (a real tea-time conversation).
This space-age has taught us that we live on a fragile planet with an onion skin atmosphere, containing all that is dear to natural life. And that we humans are converting all of it into a waste including even the narrowest band of breathable air, at an alarming rate of pollution, destruction and overpopulation.
In the words of Jeroma Karle (1985, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry), if humans continue to increase the earth’s population, destroy the environment and produce children whose lives are devoid of love, self-respect, culture and respect for the dignity of others, we can expect an increasing loss of quality of life, much suffering and violence, and a return to dark ages.’
In brief, science and technology alone cannot solve the problems of new Millennium.
Our current obsession with technology is a dead end. We need additional guidelines for our actions.
Unless the new millennium renews our faith in the unknown – the miraculous mystery of man’s soul, we shall not be able to protect our fragile planet the nature’s gift to mankind, for long. And that would reflect the darkest face of human development through science, technology and technology alone.
