The symbiotic relationship between science and liberty in democracy

I had a chance to listen to a talk delivered by Timothy Ferris, Former Editor of Rolling Stone and Professor Emeritus at U.C. Berkeley on How Science Inspired Democracy in the Modern World at Coommonwealth Club on March 8, 2010 (Ferris, 2010). His main argument is that the symbiotic relationship between sicence and liberty in democracy must be recognized. He refers to liberalism which was originated and enshrined in the English Bill of Rights 1689 and US Bill of Rights 1789. “Liberalism is based on the hypothesis that people ought to be maximally free, with the government intervening only to the extent required to protect their freedoms against abridgment by their compatriots or by enemies abroad (Ferris, 2011). His multi-dimensional views of liberalism, totalitarian, progressive, and conservative are useful (Figure 1). He said that science is anti-authoritarian. “Science, like liberalism, has no fundamental connection to the Right or the Left and liberalism is equally accessible to conservatives and progressives alike (Ferris, 2011).”

Figure 1. Two-dimensional diamond view of political dynamics

Source: (Ferris, 2011)

In this week, I read the book, Science in Democracy: Expertise, Institutions, and Representation by Mark B. Brown (2009). He intentionally selected the elements that constitute representation in his book. The five elements are namely (1) authorization, (2) accountability, (3) participation, (4) deliberation, and (5) resemblance. His main argument of the entire book is that he proposes a perspective of representativeness in democracy which avoids dichotomy between science and politics. Science is politicized because it is related to conflict and power. To solve the problem, he suggests that the politicized science should be democratized. In this country, who politicize the science? I think, there are two camps—progressives and conservatives. However, both of them have equal access to liberalism. “The opposite of conservatism, which cherishes practices that experience has shown to work in the past, is progressivism, which looks to the future (Figure 1) (Ferris, 2011).” When the science is politicized by the two camps, it is possible that they may place different values to the science which are competing each other. Science has the power to prove with facts but it does not have the power to make value judgments. When there is no politicized science, then there is no need for representation. “For representation is not needed where we expect scientifically true answers, where no value commitments, no decisions, no judgment are involved (Brown, 2009, p. 257).”

In short, it is clear to me that there is a relation between science and liberalism. Science is anti-authoritative. Whenever we do not place value or politicize the science, there will be less requirement for representation.

Reference

Brown, M. B. (2009). Science in democracy: expertise, institutions, and representation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Ferris, T. How Science Inspired Democracy in the Modern World. 2010. New York, The Commonwealth Club. 2-24-2011.

Ferris, Timothy (2011). Conservative Is Not Opposite Liberal: That's Totalitarianism. The Huffington Post.