Cyberpunktastic

I've posted this one on the discussion forum of Cyberpunk Review. If you'd like to join the debate there I'm sure your comments and input would be warmly received by SFAM and the others. Once there, click on "Virtual Meatspace" to plug in.

We've often heard about scientists "playing God". It's a charge that's levelled at scientists just about every time they come up with new ways of doing things. Rutherford was accused of "playing God" when he split the atom, just as Copernicus was accused of "playing God" when his model of the Solar System removed Terra from its centre.

Did you know that nineteenth century Irish sailors considered it unlucky to learn to swim, because to escape drowning would be to cheat destiny?

Anyway; my point: We're often told that there is a limit to how far scientists will go or how far they should go in making the world a more manageable place. But are objections to science consistent enough to actually keep the brakes on?

For example, In the USA President Bush has made history by vetoing government funding into stem cell research, calling it "murder". Where as the Chinese government is lobbying hard to get its state run stem-cell research company into the NASDAQ listings. (It's backed, of course, by American investors)

Here in the UK we're losing good pharmaceutical scientists involved in research that requires animal testing because homes are being fire-bombed, dead family members are being dug up and kidnapped (I kid you not) and families supplying the animals are living in fear. However, if you'd like to pop across the channel to Europe, scientists are free to experiment with impunity.

In most of Germany and France you'll find an opposition to Genetically Modified crops that will result in just about any trials being sabotaged before they germinate. Even African countries which are on the verge of starvation, such as Zambia and Ghana, have turned down GM maize from the World Health Organization.

Compare and Contrast with the USA, who have routinely been using GM Soya and corn products for so long that there is virtually no unmodified stock left in the production line.

And of course, we can all get hot under the collar about human cloning, unless we're from South Korea.

It seems that every culture has its demons. Whether for religious or ethical reasons there are certain aspects of technology that we instinctively shy away from. But on a truly GLOBAL scale, these local taboos become irrelevant. There will always be somebody who will pick up the torch.

Do we have a duty to establish a globally acceptable ethical code? And who should set the agenda?

Should there be global laws regulating scientific endeavour? And who should have the responsibility of policing them?

Is it fair for any nation to back away from the development of technology that it will eventually benefit from?

Discuss.