SCIENCE. RE SI ARC II AND TECHNOLOGY, 1970 587 



1978, he examined every possible facet of the burning question from 

 its legal, moral, ethical, social, public health, and particularly its 

 science policv implications. 



PROniNG AT THE EDGES OF KNOWLEDGE 



That Thornton recognized the importance of the hearing is clear 

 from his opening remarks on March 29: 



True science always stands upon a frontier. It probes at the edges of our knowl- 

 edge and our ignorance, and we accept its contributions as valuable, its continuation 

 as .1 necessity. 



He went on to explain that we are very comfortable when science tells 

 us how things work and improves our health and produces material 

 progress. But then he added: 



From time to time we find or come upon a field of inquiry which fundamentally 

 challenges our concepts of life and nature, which confronts us too directly for our 

 collective comfort or convenience, and yet intrigues us too greatly to ignore. 



Thornton contrasted the pending DNA issue with what Galileo con- 

 fronted. It was bad enough for Galileo to shock his contemporaries 

 by suggesting the "scientifically wrong" theory that the Earth act- 

 ually revolved around the Sun; what was worse was that Galileo 

 committed heresy as well. Yet even then he was only probing the 

 physical universe. Thornton reflected that most people had a nice 

 feeling of security that science would not disturb them by probing 

 the nature of life itself. However, he noted: 



DNA research challenges that presumption as profoundly as Galileo challenged 

 the science and religion of his day. It poses for the scientific community fundamental 

 questions of its role in society. It poses for Government fundamental questions of its 

 role in science. * * * 



Consideration of these questions brings us face to face with what I believe is one 

 of the most fundamental issues before policymakers today: the issue of society inter- 

 acting with science and the determination of the basic social responsibilities for the 

 decisionmaking process. 



Hollenbeck, a freshman with less than three months of service in 

 the Congress, responded with statesmanlike maturity: 



Mr. Chairman, I'm hopeful that this series of hearings will separate fact from 

 fiction on recombinant DNA research now underway in the United States. * * * A 

 large part of the dilemma facing most citizens is their honest desire to understand the 

 benefits and hazards which surround the scientific endeavor without the distortion or 

 theatrics which 30-second spot news features sometimes attain. * * * The purely 

 scientific questions focus on the development of recombinant DNA research, what it 

 offers in terms of improving the human condition, as well as agricultural applications. 

 The apprehension lurking in the back of many persons' minds is that the same power 

 ful technology which produces such genetic breakthroughs might one day backfire 

 and cause irreparable harm to our environment or to our human race. One purpose of 

 these hearings is to try to shed light on whether such an apprehension is well-founded 

 or is exaggerated. 



