Non-human Parts Research Articles

Radiobiology and gray science: Flaws in landmark new radiation protections

The International Commission on Radiological Protection--whose regularly updated recommendations are routinely adopted as law throughout the globe--recently issued the first-ever ICRP protections for the environment. These draft 2005 proposals are significant both because they offer the commission's first radiation protections for any non-human parts of the planet and because they will influence both the quality of radiation risk assessment and environmental protection, as well as the global costs of nuclear-weapons cleanup, reactor decommissioning and radioactive waste management. This piece argues that the 2005 recommendations are scientifically and ethically flawed, or gray, in at least three respects: first, in largely ignoring scientific journals while employing mainly "gray literature;" second, in relying on non-transparent dose estimates and models, rather than on actual radiation measurements; and third, in ignoring classical ethical constraints on acceptable radiation risk.

Die mens se (versteurde) verhouding met die natuur, en die opvoedingsimplikasies daarvan

One of the most important topics for discussion in the area of educational philosophy is the matter of man's relationship with and his responsibility towards nature. Nature is the non-human part of all created reality. The problem is that the world population is steadily growing whereas natural resources are divining, with the result that man is lining himself to destruction. To complicate matters, mankind does not behave responsibly towards his home, that is nature. Evidence for this statement can be found in the air and the water which is continually being polluted. Add to this also other forms of pollution like excessive sound and the results of modern technology and it becomes dear that the problem of man’s relationship with nature has already assumed grave proportions. A solution to the problem may be found in the education of children to not only understand the problem but also to see a way in which to strike a sensible balance between the exploitation of nature and ways and means to combat and neutralize the. detrimental effects of such exploitation. Even if there had been no sin or a fall into sin man would have required education to acquaint him with the correct ways to use nature and live in it, but the fall into sin has complicated matters considerably. Sin is responsible for man’s misbehavior concerning nature, and education is the main apparatus with which to combat this ill behavior.

Art and Science

COULD BE MORE DIFFERENT THAN SCIENCE AND ART? The former IS considered as a rational, objective, and cool study of nature; the latter is often regarded as a subjective, irrational outburst of feelings and emotions. One may also consider scientific discoveries as the products of imagination, of sparks of sudden insight, whereas art could be viewed as the product of painstaking work, carefully adding one part to the other by a rational thinking process. Surely art and science have something in common: both are ways to deal with our experiences and to lift our spirits from daily drudgery to universal values. But the roles of art and science in society certainly are very different. Science, unfortunately, is a closed book for most people outside the scientific community; its influence on society, however, is decisive in two ways. One is via sciencebased technology; the other is via the philosophical implications of scientific insights which, as it is often wrongly asserted, support a materialistic, rationalistic view of the world around and within us. The role of art is not so easy to define. It does, or should, contribute tp a deeper appreciation of our existence and should help us to endure the human predicament. Unfortunately, much of contemporary art is also a closed book to a large majority. Let us start with the diversity of human experiences and the diversity of what we are doing with them. There are outer and inner experiences, rational and irrational ones, social experiences between two or many human beings, and experiences with the nonhuman part of nature. Our reactions to these experiences are manifold and varied. We think and ponder about them; we make use of them to improve our lives and to avoid material and emotional hardships; we are oppressed or elated by them; we feel sadness and joy, love and hate. We are urged to act, to communicate them to others; we try to relate them to the pattern of our lives. We want to influence people and our environment. All this is the raw mate-