Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!duke!unc!mcnc!unc-c!dya From: dya@unc-c.UUCP Newsgroups: net.physics Subject: Re: nuclear fission, safety, politics Message-ID: <1113@unc-c.UUCP> Date: Fri, 30-Sep-83 20:32:32 EDT Article-I.D.: unc-c.1113 Posted: Fri Sep 30 20:32:32 1983 Date-Received: Sun, 2-Oct-83 02:15:17 EDT Lines: 31 References: ecsvax.1310 Full-Name: David Anthony Here ! Here ! Finally, another human being who can comment rationally about a needlessly overworked issue. Of course, no one wants to get irradiated, just as no one wants any other unfortunate consequence to deprive people of life or limb. However (this might be getting a bit political for net.physics) the main problem is that nuclear technology has been built up solely (well, mostly) on value-free scientific judgements. That is (as Marcuse would say) the forum in which scientific enquiry and judgement does not carry anything other than its intrinsic value, yea or nay. What I want to know is how a bunch of civilly disobedient pseudointellectuals came to have such a profound understanding of an incredibly simple, but incredibly misunderstood, issue. Furthermore, why does such a technologically advanced society have a political system which is based solely on value judgements; even when cost- benefit analysis (or other scientific methods ) could yield the superior result. If those who really understand nuclear power and the diminuitive risk which it poses to society (very diminuitive, compared from dying from a subdural haemotoma after striking one's head on the tub after slipping in it) want it, why aren't they active in the political process? What we see from those who are civilly disobedient is nothing more than anti-technological backlash. They have found an issue which is emotionally laden, and are exploting it not on the merits, but something else which I cannot identify. Those who cannot cope with rapid progress oppose it. Enuf said. .....duke!mcnc!unc-c!dya