| Photo by Jane Scherr |
Eva Harris Interview: Conversations with History; Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley
| Photo by Jane Scherr |
Page 7 of 7
We're touching on something very important about scientists or researchers who get involved in activism. We know that activist scientists, physicians, were very important in the dialogue with the Soviet Union in changing or trying to affect the arms race. Let's talk a little about being in the realm of the biological sciences. How do you navigate this area between science into activism? What are the caveats? What are the opportunities? How should we think about that?
We, in general, or me, in particular?
We, but with your personal insights.
It's interesting. This came up when we had a discussion with some of the other MacArthur Fellows. There's a group of us who got it at the same time, and we were talking about science and activism. And one of the Fellows was from a European background and said that if you're a scientist or a professional in Europe and you don't take a stand on something, you're considered a lightweight and no one will even listen to you. In the United States, if you're a scientist and you take a stand, no one will listen to you. It's an incredible thing in this country, where as soon as you become an advocate or take a stand on an issue, you "lose your objectivity" and people will no longer respect your science. You have to be very careful to maintain "objectivity" to be considered a scientist, to have people respect your work. So it's quite a slippery path.
For me, personally, as a scientist, I stick to the science. I really like being on this campus in the School of Public Health, where I can actually, for the first time, teach courses or, in my talks, bring in some of the political, social, economic aspects of this work as well. And almost openly. This is a whole new phenomenon. And I'm being very open here.
But, obviously, I do my science and I'm very, very interested in the dengue virus and how it works in the cell. I mean, I'm fascinated by it, which is why I do it. I haven't even mentioned that aspect because we're talking about this whole other aspect of my work. But I think you have to be careful in this country. Although I think that it's very important that scientists do take a stand, we are responsible, fundamentally, for what we do.
This question is raised in the movie Mind Walk, with Liv Ullman: How responsible are scientists for their work? And what about the ethical consequences? It's incredibly important. In this day and age, especially with the human genome and patenting, it's terribly important. The social and political consequences of science are lagging decades behind where technology is, and it's terribly dangerous. Scientists have to come out more and take responsibility, even though this country pushes people not to do it.
What I hear you saying is that you have to retain the integrity of the scientific work, but in moving into other areas, you have to appreciate the complexity of the social and political reality, as you bring your values to bear to bring that scientific truth into the social and political realm. Is that a fair summary?
Yes, I think so. For instance, in one's particular realm and one's discipline, one has to be objective and have a solid base to stand on. But I also think it's very important for scientists and academics to step out of the ivory tower. We are in a community. We're in a domestic community. We're in a global community. I can't stand this thinking that the world ends at the gates of the university, which is the way most academicians approach the world. I think that's dangerous. I think we have a commitment. We are getting tax dollars for our research and we need to give something back to this country and to this world. I think that we're incredibly privileged to have the life that we do, and to be able to do interesting work. We complain about it in our various little ways, but we're incredibly lucky, and we owe it to the world to give something back. Most people don't see that, and I think it's really important to see that. That's the general aspect.
But also with our own science, people have to take a stand. DNA is being patented in the most abhorrent way. I mean, you can't patent DNA just because you sequenced it! And you can't block diagnostics being available at low cost to the rest of the world because you own the patent on a piece of DNA that you didn't invent. It's disgusting. And it's going on. All these ramifications of the patenting issue on DNA, in the international arena, on the TRIPS agreements, and nobody understands what's going on. It's terrifying. So something I try to do with my classes is to make the students aware of what's going on, patenting biologicals, and agriculture, and all these kinds of issues. It's far from what I'm actually doing in the lab, of course, but it's something which I think scientists need to do -- to move into the ethical realm to a larger extent.
We're going back to your theme of access, and one of the keys to access is public understanding of the issues. It seems that your work and your journey, thus far, raise a lot of interesting questions about science and about international cooperation. What insights would you like students to draw from the kinds of things we've talked about?
[I give] a lot of outreach talks entitled "Science across Borders." Frontiers --not just geographical frontiers, but gender issues, economic issues. Science is a great way to break down boundaries. We do science in an international community, and we have to continue fostering that spirit. And it's great. When you look at papers, there's all these crazy names from all over the world. It's fun -- even basic research is an international endeavor, to a large extent, in terms of not having boundaries. It's an exciting area for a number of reasons, and I think that people need to bring the social context to science. Of course, young people coming into the field can carry that with them, more than the people who are already set in their ways.
The hope of this movement from science to the society is to change society for the better.
Yes. Certainly, even in the most narrow definition, to eradicate disease, which is huge in and of itself. And then, of course, there's all the other kinds of bonds, the international collaborations that can be made, the empowerment. And not just internationally. Right into Oakland, for instance. We can start right here in our backyard. There are a lot of positive messages that can come through this.
Is there a particular thing that you would say to women who think about going into science, either about the obstacles you had to overcome or what women can bring to science?
I'm probably going to be disappointing to you, but I don't feel like I've had obstacles in being a woman. There are obstacles -- and I haven't resolved them -- in bridging academic, science, and social issues. In what I'm trying to do, I feel like the jury's still out. Not knowing if you will get tenure is hard. It's not like I have a beaten track, I can say, "Hey everyone, follow this." It would be an issue for anyone trying to do this, as opposed to women in particular. But that is a challenge and I encourage people to take it on.
One final question. I'm left with a sense that there is a way to bridge the search for scientific truth and a value-driven concern about what the world is and what it can become.
Yes. What I would say is hold on to your values and follow your passion. If you believe in something and you have a vision, just go for it. That's the most important thing. I could never have said exactly what I was going to do, but I knew that this vision was important and I was not going to let it go. There are a lot of people who feel things are important. You have to be good [at what you do], but if you believe in something, follow your passion. I think that that's the most important thing. Don't let go of values, because that's what's going to matter. You're the one who's going to live with it for the rest of your life. If you can hold on to good values and make a positive impact on the world, then everybody else is going to benefit.
On that note, Eva, thank you very much for taking the time to talk about your work. And thank you very much for joining us for this Conversation with History.
© Copyright 2001, Regents of the University of California
To the Conversations page