Published by the MIT News Office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.

Faculty Make 30-Year Predictions

GOOD AND BAD
Faculty Make 30-Year Predictions for Time Capsule
By Charles H. Ball
News Office

Eight MIT professors, looking three decades ahead, have combined 
warnings of potential worldwide disaster, tied largely to overpopulation 
and environmental damage, with visions of dramatic progress in science 
and technology.

The panel discussion, called the "Vision 2020 Roundtable," was held on 
April 29 at the MIT Faculty Club in connection with the inauguration of 
Charles M. Vest. A transcript of the group's predictions was included in 
a time capsule buried last Thursday in Killian Court. The capsule will 
be opened in the year 2020.

The remarks of Dr. Robert A. Weinberg, professor of biology and one of 
the nation's leading cancer researchers, exemplified both the 
pessimistic and optimistic sides of the discussion.

At one point, he predicted that by the year 2020 "certain localized 
areas of the world" will have experienced "massive starvation and 
famine" and "ecological collapse," due in large part "to inexorable 
population growth." By 2020, he added, those who were leaders in1991 and 
who "resisted reducing population growth, limiting the ecological 
devastation, and attempting to reverse the trends of climatic change" 
will be seen as "criminally negligent."

But he also had more hopeful thoughts. "From the point of view of 
biological sciences and medicine," he said, "by the year 2020 most of 
the major killer diseases that now strike us down in our sixties and 
seventies, such as circulatory diseases, heart diseases, and likely even 
Alzheimer's disease, will have in large part been dealt with. And we 
will as a consequence have an attendant increase in life span, perhaps 
well into the eighties, if not beyond that."

Virtually all the panelists had a particularly bleak view of America's 
public education system and the general lack of knowledge about science 
and technology.

"I think it is correct to say that the educational system in the past 30 
years has not improved, it has gotten worse," said Dr. Joel Moses, dean 
of the School of Engineering, who added that "we need to get people to 
think in terms of excellence." 

He suggested the formation of a "national coalition" of university and 
industry leaders "to try to figure out how to get the message across 
about the importance of pre-college education generally to our 
competitive position."

It was Dr. Moses, a professor of electrical engineering and computer 
science, who also said he could foresee a "quite revolutionary" 
development of fibre optics that could include cables "in every home," 
greatly enhancing and expanding the ability of individuals throughout 
the world to communicate and exchange information. "When you consider. . 
. the totality of the applications that are likely to be available, we 
are talking about something that makes Star Wars look puny," he said.

Several of the panelists said they were concerned with an "anti-science" 
trend among the population, to the point where some critics see science 
as "an evil force," as one put it. Professor Mary Boyce from the 
Department of Mechanical Engineering said one result of this would be to 
affect the ability of schools like MIT "to attract the best people to 
the sciences. . . to come here and not to become lawyers and doctors." 
As a way to counter this, she said, graduates of schools like MIT should 
be trained "to represent our profession" both in a "public relations" 
sense and "in a politically appropriate manner." 

In this same vein, Dr. Ronald G. Prinn, professor of atmospheric 
chemistry, said he would like to see a "small fraction" of scientists 
and engineers move "into the political arena" because "the business of 
making laws and policies in Washington is far too important to be left 
to the mix of people who presently end up in Congress." 

Professor Ann F. Freidlaender, an economist and moderator for the 
discussion, said she was concerned about about the nation's ability "to 
continue to take a leadership role in the world," adding, "We as a 
nation are going to have to make some very hard decisions with respect 
to savings and investment rates, the government deficit and the 
international balance of payments that I don't see us making."

Dr. Nelson Y.S. Kiang, a professor in the Department of Brain and 
Cognitive Sciences, said that, given the growth of human population, 
"the question is whether we can use our brain to handle the situation." 
He continued, I mean very soon, within the next three decades. . . Most 
people don't realize how short the time is--they think in terms of 
centuries, but we really only have decades."

Professor Henry D. Jacoby of the Sloan School of Management and chair of 
the MIT faculty, said that science and technology could not be a 
solution in themselves without changes in "human behavior and social 
organization." Failure to deal with such problem areas as the 
environment and the aging of the population "will be perceived to be 
failures of human organization, human behavior, social organization and 
the like," he said.

Professor Phillip L. Clay of the Department of Urban Studies and 
Planning made the point that the panel was "in some ways" addressing 
many of the same questions that were asked in the late 1950s and early 
1960's--an era when concerns also were being raised about education and 
competiveness. And what I guess I sense we don't have now is a similar 
voice about the American role and a way of getting to achieve a vision 
about a place in the world--voices that I thought were reasonably clear 
about the American direction in the early 60s certainly."

The panel spent part of its two-hour session looking at what MIT can 
contribute. Professor Friedlaender said the university should draw on 
its ability to bring people "from a wide range of disciplines into 
dealing with pressing national or international problems."

 Professor Weinberg said universities such as MIT increasingly would be 
asked to become directly involved in providing solutions to problems. 
But he agreed with Professor Jacoby that "the great limiting spectre in 
our society's solution of its problems is not necessarily the technology 
that we have to offer. . . but our ability as a society to rationally 
and effectively make intelligent kinds of decisions."