Q&A: Using science for good or ill
1 October 2009
What is the dual-use dilemma?
Traditionally, 'dual-use' was used to describe technologies with both military and non-military applications, and it had positive connotations. More recently, the term 'dual-use dilemma' has been used to refer to the quandary arising when scientific work can be used in ethical or unethical ways, and it's not clear whether the risk of misuse is outweighed by the likelihood of good uses or not. A classic example is nuclear physics in the first half of the 20th century, when scientists knew that their work could be used for good (e.g. power generation and medicine) and for bad (e.g. nuclear weapons).
What are the major issues today?
More recently, discussion has been prompted by two studies published in 2001 and 2002 - one reporting the synthesis of polio virus, the other the genetic modification of the mousepox virus. These papers coincided with the events of 9/11 and prompted a concerned response in the USA. There was even some suggestion that scientific journals might need to be censored. Now, many people believe that this was an overreaction, and think that it is important to be careful when introducing any new regulations, as these could stifle scientific progress.
What did you include in the POSTnote?
The note includes case studies - areas of science that have raised concerns about misuse - and possible policy responses. One issue revolves around the concern that in the future it might be possible to use neuroimaging techniques to invade people's privacy and see what's going on in their mind. Another issue is the development of DNA synthesis techniques that might allow the creation of viruses or bacteria that are human pathogens for use in biological weapons.
Why worry about dual-use?
The problem of the misuse of science has attracted a lot of interest from those working in areas such as peace studies. There has been an effort by academics and governments to develop and strengthen chemical and biological weapons conventions, and misuse is now on the agenda of science policy makers and security policy makers. However, the dual-use dilemma isn't something that ethicists have really thought about much in the past, even though it's a practically important problem that raises difficult ethical issues. For example, it's not at all clear whether or to what extent scientists are morally responsible for how their work gets used. There's a clear opportunity for ethicists to have an input now.
What's next for you?
When I've finished my DPhil I'll be starting a three-year Research Fellowship in Biomedical Ethics. The POSTnote, being neutral, did not give any ethical argument as to what should be done. In my postdoc I'm going to look at some specifically ethical questions, including: when, if ever, is it necessary to think about the risks of scientific work being misused; who should think about these risks; and how should the risks and benefits be balanced? I'm also looking forward to collaborating with colleagues at Bradford, Exeter and Bath Universities who have recently been awarded a Wellcome Trust Biomedical Ethics Enhancement Award to study dual-use.
What do you do outside of work?
I play cricket and do a bit of sailing and hiking. I used to be a competitive runner and still run a lot.
Image: Tom Douglas