Introductory Remarks

Dr. Irving A. Lerch

Chair of the AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility and Director of International Affairs at The American Physical Society

Delivered at MIT, Cambridge, MA, March 29, 1999.

Thank you, Chairman d'Arbeloff.

On behalf of the AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility, I am honored to welcome you to this colloquium on, "Secrecy in Science." We are indebted to MIT and to Mark Frankel and his staff for organizing this very important meeting.

The cause of freedom in the conduct of science has been under review by the Committee since 1997 when discussions were first held to try to outline the issues and impact that secrecy has had on the US scientific enterprise. Our initial discussions and examinations focused on the role of commercial enterprises in suppressing scientific exchange and the concomitant failure of universities and medical institutions to support individual researchers in the face of legal challenges. This was continued in 1998 when the Committee examined the pressures imposed by governmental and intergovernmental organizations on consultant academics.

Let me take as a point of departure, the following declaration by Kingman Brewster, the former President of Yale who had an intimate knowledge of the hazards to academic freedom:

"Universities should be safe havens where ruthless examination of realities will not be distorted by the aim to please or inhibited by the risk of displeasure."

But the University cannot be a bastion of free scientific inquiry without a broader societal framework. This was promulgated by US Federal District Judge, Leonie M. Brinkema:

"The First Amendment represents a conscious and explicit trade-off which the Founding Fathers made between paternalistic protection from 'harmful' thoughts and free access to information. Where statutorily and constitutionally protected speech is concerned, our system permits an individual's fate to be sealed by the individual's choices rather than governmental monitoring."

But the government is no longer the chief impediment to free scientificexchange. Many new pressures have emerged to threaten the independence of the, "Republic of Science."

There are two quotes we might keep in mind when assessing the obstacles to open scientific exchange:

The first, by Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855), expresses the paternalistic view often used by government to justify the imposition of social responsibility through the management of information: "People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."

Whereas the more forthright modern view of the value of proprietary information sponsored by commercial interests is succinctly stated as

follows: "The secret of success is to know something nobody else knows." Aristotle Onassis (1906-1975).

Our era has seen the emergence of commercial patronage as a major factor threatening open scientific exchange.

In pursuing its study of secrecy in science, especially as characterized in today's complex and interconnected world of competing interests and organizations, the Committee has uncovered a taxonomy of secrecy which threatens open communication:

* Government limits for reasons of security

* Scientists intent on preserving priority of discovery

* Industry intent on preserving value of investment

* Industry, government and other organizations suppressing consultant reports

* Scientists failing to disclose relevant information to scientific journals

* Legal challenges by individuals and organizations

* Public, political pressure on scientists

All of these issues will be touched upon in today's colloquium and wehope that the resulting discussion will illuminate the conundrum we face. How do we preserve the vigor of science as a cultural enterprise in the face of a growing web of proprietary entanglements?

It is my great pleasure to introduce the President of MIT, Charles M. Vest.

Program | Speaker Bios | Presentations| Selected Readings | Home