NationStates Jolt Archive

Go here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469193).

Suggestions:
>It should be reasonably vague, since UN member nations have diverse values (Caratia is strongly opposed to any kind of embryonic research, for example).
----->It could include something about controversial research.
----->It should not be so vague that it is unenforcable.
----->It could impose a boundary between "scientific freedom" and "irresponsible testing", but should still be open to interperetation as per my first suggestion.
>It should include something about freedom of environmental research.

A. T. Stilgram
Caratian Ambassador to the United Nations

The new resolution should definitely be a little more clear and little more binding, as far as freedom is concerned, but I don't believe we need to restrict anything outright.

Go here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469193).

I like that the resolution requires nations to study responsible science but doesn't restrict anything. Nice draft.

Thank you, and ker-BUMP

OOC: I'd be very interested in seeing any draft of a proposal, even if it's only halfway done. That would give me a better starting point from where to start analyzing the impact/scope of the proposal. Could you provide a rough outline to start?

Er... look UP. ^Thataway^

I already had a replacement:

The NationStates United Nations,

CONSIDERING the repeal of Resolution #2: Scientific Freedom,

AFFIRMING the lack of concrete protection the Resolution #2 provided for scientists,

AFFIRMING the reasons for the repeal,

CONSIDERING the advantages of greater scientific freedom, such as economic prosperity, greater insight into how the world works, as well as possible advances in medical science,

ACKNOWLEDGING the value of religion, which however should be clearly separate from science,

1. AFFIRMS the Freedom of Science as a fundamental right across UN member nations,

2. DEFINES science as the system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific methods, i.e. methodically trying to falsify hypotheses based on objective experimenting which can be reproduced,

3. MANDATES that no scientist may be prosecuted for conducting scientific research, publishing scientific research or reading scientific publications, nor unreasonably restricted in any other way,

4. AUTHORIZES individual nations to exempt scientific research from the general UN protection granted in clause 3 that:
a. is acquired through methods that violate human or animal rights according to UN legislation;
b. is aimed at warfare or otherwise damaging persons or animals or the environment (except where it is the only way greater damage can be prevented);
c. depends on "divine beings" as explanations for phenomena;
d. contains plagiarized material or material which by contract was not (yet) to be published;

5. EXPRESSES ITS HOPE that through science, the lives of UN citizens will improve in the centuries to come.

ACKNOWLEDGING the value of religion, which however should be clearly separate from science,
Seems to me a good way to separate religion from science would be to not mention the former in a resolution about the latter. Lose this line.

1. AFFIRMS the Freedom of Science as a fundamental right across UN member nations,
I like this approach. Vague enough that it means, well, nothing, so we can implement it as we see fit. I think some degree of consideration of sovereignty is appropriate in this matter. In a sense, I'm surprised this attempt isn't stronger.

2. DEFINES science as the system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific methods, i.e. methodically trying to falsify hypotheses based on objective experimenting which can be reproduced,
I guess this is fair enough; it'll be interesting watching the legalists try to work their way through this. As with Artistic Freedom, though, I wonder if it's appropriate for a universal definition to be enforced.

3. MANDATES that no scientist may be prosecuted for conducting scientific research, publishing scientific research or reading scientific publications, nor unreasonably restricted in any other way,
Fortunately you don't define "scientist", or else we'd really be sweating at this clause.

c. depends on "divine beings" as explanations for phenomena;
Lose this line; it's needless.

d. contains plagiarized material or material which by contract was not (yet) to be published;
Perhaps also "violates national or international intellectual property laws"

5. EXPRESSES ITS HOPE that through science, the lives of UN citizens will improve in the centuries to come.
Pass me the brown paper bag. I would lose this line; seems pretty pointless.

Also, apologies for breaking it down into sections to comment. I find this easier to deal with, but I know it offends some people.

Both drafts show promise. However, if I may, I'd like to draw your attention to a worthy draft authored by the representative from Bazalonia:

Link to discussion (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469193)

Freedom of Scientific Research

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

RECOGNISING the many benefits of scientific research such as:
- Medical drugs, procedures and practices
- More environmentally friendly technologies
- More efficient and effective time-saving devices

BELIEVING that scientists should be able to research any legal topic without undue restrictions on the research or the results of that research,

UNDERSTANDING that scientific advances that are made for the betterment of the life of any persons should be available to all UN nations,

DEFINES 'home-grown scientific endeavour' for the purpose of this resolution as any scientific theory, procedure, law or any goods derived from such process within the UN Member nation, not including any weapons, weapon components, weapon systems, blueprints or technologies whose purpose is of a destructive purpose,

DEFINES 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aid in scientific research,

DEFINES 'areas of research' for the purpose of this resolution as any topic, methodology or practice that is to be researched or can be used during the research process,

HEREBY

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES governments to streamline procedures for the exporting of home-grown scientific endeavours, however ensuring that whatever entity exports the home-grown scientific endeavour has the right to so under international and national law;

SUPPORTS governments' rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes;

SUPPORTS governments' rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not;

MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their spouse and/or children) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such research;

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by:
a. Removing or loosening of restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic health and safety requirements for the people who may be affected, as well as the environment in which the research is taking place;
b. Removing or loosening of restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substantial safety issues involved;
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and removing or loosening restrictions on as many materials as is safe to do so;
Perhaps we could use all the drafts at hand to come up with a desirable proposal?

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

I was pretty much in favor of the repeal to Scientific Freedom, even though I firmly believe in a responsible level of scientific freedom and this is still the general law of the land in Tzorsland. Unfortunately I'm having a very hard time trying to come up with an idea for a good resolution on scientific freedom or one that I can reasonably support. Since we are generally concerned with the happy medium, we need to consider both sides of the restriction.

On the one hand is the problem with nations that offer no scientific freedom. Generally we don't give out licences to be stupid, but I think it's a fundamental right of a nation to have the ability to be stupid. Nations that have no scientific freedom do not advance. Instead they regress into isloationism and collapsed economies. If they really want a licence to be stupid why should we prevent them from getting one?

On the other hand is the problem with defining the moral boundaries of scientific freedom. The moral questions of life, the universe and everything is one of those issues that can and must be hotly debated. This debate needs to take place on a national level. This is the same argument we applied to the abortion issue.

Now I am not saying we can't have a good Scientific Freedom resolution, but as the great bard once said, "think about it for a moment." This is the UN, and the UN is concerned not with national issues - unless it involves a findamental human rights issue and this ain't one - but international issues. So from a UN perspective scientific freedom should be a FREE TRADE issue; the free flow of scientific ideas and research across national boundaries.

Here's my theory:
Scientific Freedom is based upon the freedom of ideas, a basic human right guaranteed by most responsible constitutions in the RL world. (I don't know what most of y'all's constitutions say, so I can't use them.) To abridge the exploration of science for political, moral or religious reasons is to abridge the free flow of ideas.

That being said, there is a moral side to all of this. Certain sciences are simply bad for the world. Take eugenics, a somewhat overused example of 'bad science'. Because of that, this resolution sets aside certain areas of science that are 'responsible' and are required to be legal in UN member states. It has a non-binding provision at the bottom which states, essentially, that individual member states are free to choose whether or not to legalize what might be termed 'irresponsible' science. But that choice is left up to them.

So the way I see it, it is a fundamental human right to be able to explore, test and share new ideas. The restriction of that right is no different than the restriction on free speech; it separates ideas into two camps, that which is supported by the government, and that which is not. The United Nations has always sought to support free speech, religion, and ideas.
Of course, science does, in all tangible ways, contribute to trade above other consideratios. So I'd probably put this as Free Trade, Moderate.

Both drafts show promise. However, if I may, I'd like to draw your attention to a worthy draft authored by the representative from Bazalonia:

Link to discussion (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469193)


Perhaps we could use all the drafts at hand to come up with a desirable proposal?

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

I would support the Bazalonian resolution. Very well done.

First I would like to thank the representative from WyldTree for their comments.

As for free trade, the proposal that I had drafted takes this into account, however it may not be strong enough.

The purpose of the original proposal was to encourage scientific research, by removing as many restrictions on scientific research as possible. However, the freedom for research does not over-write nations ability to determine what methods or topics for scientific research are morally inreprehensible.

The governments ability to deem topics and methods available for research are Balanced by the fact that scientists and their families must be able to move to another UN member nation that supports this. If member nations go over board with the restrictions then all that will serve to accomplish will that nation loose the benefit of those scienitists in the future.

If anyone has any suggestions on how to strengthen the free trade, or even thinks that such strengthening is not required. Your comments are appreciated.

I have also made a couple of minor edits, I have bolded them


Freedom of Scientific Research

Category: Free Trade
Strength: Mild

RECOGNISING the many benefits of scientific research such as:
- Medical drugs, procedures and practices
- More environmentally friendly technologies
- More efficient and effective time-saving devices

BELIEVING that scientists should be able to research any legal topic without undue restrictions on the research or the results of that research.

UNDERSTANDING that scientific advances that are made for the betterment of the life of any persons should be available to all UN nations

DEFINES 'home-grown scientific endeavour' for the purpose of this resolution as any scientific theory, procedure, law or any goods derived from such process within the UN Member nation, not including any weapons, weapon components, weapon systems, blueprints or technologies whose purpose is of a destructive nature.

DEFINES 'scientific equipment' as any equipment used to aid in scientific research.

DEFINES 'areas of research' for the purpose of this resolution as any topic, methodology or practice that is to be researched or can be used during the research process.

HEREBY

STRONGLY ENCOURAGES governments to streamline procedures for the exporting of home-grown scientific endeavours, however ensuring that whatever entity exports the home-grown scientific endeavour has the right to so under international and national law.

SUPPORTS governments' rights to regulate or prohibit distribution of explosives or other dangerous materials, such as radioactive isotopes.

SUPPORTS governments' rights to determine whether certain areas of research are illegal or not.

MANDATES that any scientist wishing to conduct research in an area of research that is illegal in their home nation may relocate (as well as their spouse and/or children) to another UN Member nation that does not have bans on such research

ENCOURAGES governments to loosen restrictions placed on scientific research by...
a. Removing or loosening of restrictions on where scientific research can take place, excluding basic health and safety requirements for the people researching, as well as the environment in which the research is taking place.
b. Removing or loosening of restrictions on obtaining scientific equipment, unless there are specific and substantial safety issues involved.
c. Re-evaluating restrictions on materials used during scientific research and removing or loosening restrictions on as many materials as it is safe to do so.


Yours Sincerly, John MacKay
Ambassador to the UN

I can get behind that. Balzonia's proposal is better written than mine is, and we really only need one. I suggest that you all go to This thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=469193). That being said, the Balzonian resolution does have some tenets which I believe should be changed, but we can discuss that in their thread.