By Syed Nasir Ershad

Perhaps there is a general perception among a significant section of the younger generation of these days that politics is not their cup of tea. They carry a negative vibe against the political affairs of the present era. But that raises a big challenge for the future and the ability of our most cherished political institution, i.e. democracy, to guide that future.
On the other hand science has changed our way of life drastically. Over the past couple of centuries, advancement of science has fundamentally changed the meaning of human culture via revolutions in industry, transportation and communications. This globally connected society which is capable of instantly transferring information was unbelievable to earlier generations that preceded us. Looking forward, science will soon be giving us even greater powers. Genetic engineering is one such example which might redefine what it even means to be human. Science has given the human race great power. It is known that with great power comes great responsibility.
There will be issues to consider, like genetically modified foods, cloning, limits for electronic surveillance, use of robots, etc. These issues has to be dealt with science and policy. Or should we say science and politics?
One critical case is that of climate change. It has already been settled that earth’s climate is changing due to human activity. Policymakers have known about the dangers of climate change since 1960s. But, nothing significant has been done to deal with the issue. The political battle over the science of climate change makes is ongoing. How science understands the world is vastly different from how politics acts in the world. What is of more concern is that the climate issue is only one of the existential questions we face. Genetics, robotics, big data, artificial intelligence, energy modalities — each one has the capacity to drive radical shifts in our culture. All of these may pose fundamental changes to human culture, be it positive or negative. It depends on the choices being made.
The problem may not be solved by simply paying more attention to scientific experts. In such case as climate change, it is clear that science is being ignored or distorted by some in the arena of politics. Ignoring what scientists are telling in this domain is an ultimately self-destructive act. But when it comes to telling what should be done about climate change, scientists are not in a privileged position.
Politics should run in a domain ruled by values as well as facts. Science usually strives to step back from questions of what is the set of values, rather asks only how the world behaves. Thus the reasons for the difference between science and politics are many and not always the fault of politicians. Only a small fraction of the general population are actually scientists. That means very few people have direct contact with the day-to-day realities of how science reaches its conclusions and builds consensus. As a result, most people have a hard time telling the difference between firmly established laws of nature and the back and forth of unsettled questions. It is this incomprehension about how science works that makes the difference between science and politics so precarious for democracies. When it is difficult to understand how science reaches its conclusions, it is all too easy for vested interests to misconstrue, misinform and misdirect public debate. Education will bring awareness among the people to minimize the gap of understanding, and hence will lead towards better adoption and implementation of policies based on scientific facts and realities.