Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!nanotech From: macleod@drivax.UUCP (MacLeod) Newsgroups: sci.nanotech Subject: Re: Why I think Nanotechnology is Bogus Message-ID: Date: 7 Jul 89 00:25:54 GMT Sender: nanotech@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Digital Research, Monterey, CA Lines: 27 Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu : ...However, I really think : that the statement "the problems of our world are political, social and : psychological rather than technological" is unconsidered. There are not : "social" vs "technological" *problems*, but rather social vs technological : *solutions*. In my reading of history, social and political solutions : *do not work*, but the problems technology has been applied to have been : decimated. I further claim that the technological solution to the problems : you are worrying about is to make human beings more intelligent; : nanotechnology is a plausible approach. : --JoSH] I think Buckminster Fuller put it most succinctly: "Don't try to reform man; reform the environment." Michael Sloan MacLeod (amdahl!drivax!macleod) [Buckminster Fuller also designed a car shaped like a fish, with reverse tricycle stance. In general, today, his maxim is correct, however. This simply reflects that technological solutions work, socio-political ones do not. "Making people smarter", by the way, does not *necessarily* mean going in and twiddling with their brains. Hypertext publishing systems and fact fora are a start toward smarter people, in the sense that they are more likely to make the right decisions. Computer link implants, expert system encyclopedias, etc, etc, etc are steps on the way. --JoSH]