E D I T O R I A L

  The products and ways of nature do not always appeal to human tastes - neither the bruised tomato, pestering rats nor even our own deaths. In response, the so-called perfection of these undesirables of nature falls under the wing of science.

  Science's travels into uncharted "imperfect" territories have resulted in great achievements. Exploration in the name of science is also accepted as part of "human nature," an unending process fulfilling our desires for competition and discovery. But history has also shown us that the further or deeper we travel, the greater is the potential for causing destructive side effects, often without any intentions on our part to cause harm.

  Who could have predicted that Europeans landing in the Americas would bring with them foreign viruses capable of causing the devastation of native populations? It is doubtful that many would have guessed the links between oil consumption and the current floods and fires associated with global warming. It is said that Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb, only realised the vicious possibilities of his creation while viewing its first successful explosion. Truly, nuclear science does provide us with seemingly endless quantities of consumptive energy, but its past human use serves more to shame the human race than to commend it.

  With most of our planet's surface now mapped and conquered, our new frontiers are the earth's crust, outer space, matter and life itself. Playing with life, however, more than any other territory, demands ethical debate, particularly concerning our relationship with nature (and God for many) and our limits. Given science's historical record, lessons have been learned and must be considered, even though "sound scientific principles" have been followed by scientists genuinely concerned about the good of humankind and perhaps of nature itself. The fruits of science do unleash unexpected evils and do fall inevitably into bad hands. Falling short of forecasting doom, how can we possibly know what forces are currently at play in the natural world waiting to explode?

  Scientists argue that their genetic manipulation of the tomato is in the name of "sustainability," a term which has as many interpretations as the word "snow" in the Arctic. For genetic engineers, sustainability means more food, security and efficiency and less costs, labour and herbicide sprays. For most environmentalists, sustainability is defined more as disrupting nature as little as possible, committed to a respect for things as they are, created mysteriously for a purpose beyond our comprehension, knowing that nature can "retaliate" to restore an altered balance, and that human consumptive interests are no more significant than a bruised tomato, naturally speaking.

  Final food for thought. The more we delve into new territories, the less we appreciate that which is before us. And a tomato that's good for me may not be to your liking. But hey, I'm not perfect.

  Note: Consideration of a new name and structure for The Bulletin is ongoing, the results of which will be presented in the upcoming Summer 1998 issue.

Paul Csagoly  
Editor of The Bulletin