1972, June, Pg. 1. Technology Assessment and the Brave New World of the Future.

• Author: by Richard D. Lamm

1 Colo.Law. 1

Colorado Lawyer

1972.

1972, June, Pg. 1.

Technology Assessment and the Brave New World of the Future

1Vol. 1, No. 8, Pg. 1

Technology Assessment and the Brave New World of the Futureby Richard D. LammRichard D. Lamm, Denver, is a partner in the firm of Lamm and Young and is currently Associate Professor of Law at the University of Denver and Assistant Minority Leader of the Colorado House of Representatives. He has long been concerned with the inability of legislative bodies to deal and the law to deal with future-oriented problems. His article, which originally appeared in the Congressional Record for December 17, 1971, argues for the development of new institutions which can better anticipate tomorrow's problems today."Technology" is one of the most important words in the Twentieth Century vocabulary. It promises to bring a cornucopia of benefits to mankind, and simultaneously solve by more of the same any problems caused by the production of those benefits. It is the Twentieth Century equivalent of the miracle of the loaves and fishes.

Scientists, technicians and the public at large react defensively to any criticism or questioning of technology. The profound cliche goes, "Technology is not bad itself; it's what we do with it." Any interference with "seeking for truth" is unthinkable; any problem "caused by science will be solved by science."

It is not quite that simple. Mercury polution, radiation, detergents, insecticides, asbestos, air and water pollution---all have recently shown there is another not-so-pleasant side to technology. We are finding that there are many subtle but potentially far-reaching toxic insults which we are releasing into our atmosphere, adding to our foods, spreading on our farmlands, produced directly or indirectly by our industries. We are sweeping at an accelerating pace into an unknown future sustained by a new blind faith in science and the thin straw of hope that we will be as successful in the future as we have been in the past.

There is another facet to the complexity. Recent advances in biology, genetics, and medicine show us that biomedical technology might hold the biggest surprises of a surprise-filled future. The next twenty years may well see the laboratory fertilization of humans, pre-determination of sex of unborn children, control of aging, development of an artificial placenta, asexual

2reproduction of human beings (cloning), the production of animal-human hybrids (chimera), genetic surgery, drugs to modify behavior. The list of immediately recognizable "advances" is awesome; the possible unknown or unrecognized "break-throughs" give reason for pause. Recently, Leon R. Kass, a noted biochemist, stated, "We need only consult Aldous Huxley's prophetic novel Brave New World to get an indication of where we are likely to be going. In Huxley we encounter a society dedicated to homogeneity and stability, administered by means of instant gratification and peopled by creatures of human shape but of stunted humanity. They consume, fornicate, take `soma,' and operate the machinery that makes it all possible. They do not read, write, think, love or govern themselves. Creativity and curiosity, reason and passion, exist only in a rudimentary and mutilated form. In short, they are not men at all."(fn1)There are yet other facets. Technology may usurp much of our privacy, making Brave New World a reality and bringing George Orwell's 1984 before its time. Microminiaturization has reduced the size of microphones to the size of a matchhead carrying conversations more than a quarter of a mile, and one scientist promises a mechanism for recording speech through solid walls via a reflector made of a thin diaphragm and a microwave antenna. More yet---we can already photograph from afar, tap telephone lines, spy via closed circuit T.V., and determine the content of mail without opening it; behavior-modifying drugs have already been used to "pacify" schoolchildren. We may soon be able to do more than invade privacy; we may soon be able to control actions.(fn2)

Old Controls Are InadequateWe thus are finding increasingly that technology is a two-edged sword; we are finding that much more thought must be given to its impact on society. We are finding that the old mechanisms are not adequate to control the new dangers. This is due to four main reasons.

The first results from the mere speed of technological change itself. The rate of change is accelerating rapidly. We spend today some 16% of our total federal budget on Research and Development, and private industry injects vast billions more into the process of technological change. The former slow, careful process of invention, application and dispersement of new technologies has been condensed in time. We experience a millenium of change every few years.(fn3)

The second involves our ability to effect change in greater numbers of people. When we made a pollution mistake in 1930, only a few downstream users were affected. If we make a mistake in 1970 with the underground nuclear...