A reasonably dispassionate reading of Senator Bond's speech suggests that he makes enough *good* points that the levels of attack seen thus far on this lists strike me as reactionary far more than reflective.

In bio-thechnology we are up against another one of those "we now have more power than wisdom" dilemmas. That bio-technology is powerful is incontestible. That it is already here is equally incontestible. Like any technology it can produce good, and it can produce harm. FIRE can keep you warm and cook your food. It can also burn you and destroy your house. Is the problem fire itself, or the careless use thereof?

Genetic engineering and other biotechnology, especially when applied to fermentation *will* produce great good. Insulin is already an example of this. I have stated on this list before that Jews and Moslems are not thrilled by the prospects of pork genes in unidentified tomatoes. Before genetic engineering, diabetic Jews and Moslems had a serious problem in that all insulin was derived from (first) dogs and (later) pigs, both of them "unclean" animals for adherants of those faiths. Biotechnology has made it possible in recent years to produce massive amounts of very pure insulin in a fermentation vat.

I ask of the opponents of biotechnology on this list one simple question ---

Are you categorically opposed to all genetic engineering without exception?

Desires and attempts to ban an entire technology seek to redress the power--wisdom imbalance by repressing the power, rather than by increasing the wisdom. Attempts to suppress new technologies that clearly offer some benefits are ultimately both counter-productive and futile. Seeking to increase wisdom, however, in a society in which education is failing and disintegrating in direct proportion to the amount of money poured into it, is (er..) challenging, to say the least.

Even more difficult is that, having decided as a society to function on the basis of feelings rather than reason, and having thereby abandoned any clear and consistent sense of right and wrong, we have effectively eliminated the substrate from which wisdom has usually emerged. By default we are left with what typically develoves into a straight power struggle.

Tragically, in such situations there is usually a winning side and a losing side. Which ever side 'wins' has significant flaws that -- by virtue of the 'win' -- are widely imposed with unfortunate long-term results. In the case of bio-technology these unfortunate results could be environmental if one side 'wins.' If, however, the opponents 'win,' we collectively lose access to many of the very genuine benefits enumerated by Senator Bond .

I think we ought to be able to do better. Whether we can or not is less clear. In yet another example of the separation in time of cause and effect, we are --- in our polarised inability to seek or develop wisdom --- reaping the results of the "everything is relative," "feelings trump reason," "each person defines their own truth" school of Postmodernism that began its ascendancy some 30 years ago.

It's a power struggle no one can really win because we have largely lost our basis for developing the wisdom we so badly need.

Bart Hall

** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed for research and educational purposes only. **