As my roomate likes to point out, Bioengineering will one day cure his diabetes, and he is not wrong. As we’ve fully sequences the human genome, humans near a genetic manipulation only before seen in science fiction movies. As far as I am from understanding the field of biology I believe science to be an art. The careful study of natural structures looks at the near perfection of evolution and tries to replicate. Whether one believes in an ultimate creator is a point of contention for many, but the undeniably factor is the skill and art by which life is composed.
In research, science seeks to emulate nature and natural structures, as nature is the greatest designer of all. However, in creating a new biology we run the risk of infusing our emotions and desires. That is the most daunting task of all keeping science free from the human whims. As a race we are not prepared to be creators of new biology, and a case can surely be made for the need to experiment with creation as it will surely mature us in the matter. But because the field is just now expanding it is always important to remember our humanity as a possible stain on science. Peer reviews, ethic boards and the like already do much to curb this appetite for creating something new, but it is becoming increasingly easier to meddle in the sciences. A proper education and mentorship is strongly urged.
As far as art goes, specifically in the technoscience field. It can be as a looking glass onto the field of creation. Art is slightly askew from the static human perspective and it shines new light on a topic. If discussed by the right people, and not written off as just wild installations, Art can be a useful commentary into the human interaction with science and the subjectivity of a human’s creation.
I made mention of art seen as “just wild installations” and therein lies the problem with art.
Pedro Jesus Diaz (student Tuesday 1 pm)