Science, Education and Development

René G. Favaloro

Tel Aviv, May 1995

Ladies and Gentlemen

I must confess that I feel very happy to be here again, in Israel, a country I have always admired, and particularly on this occasion, the laying of the foundation stone of a new library. In spite of all the advances we see in modern technology, I still believe that libraries are necessary for the development of education and knowledge. It is impossible to think of a University without a good library, and I am sure that this will become a treasure house for your country.

I myself am the product of the University of La Plata, whose motto is: "For Science and for Our Homeland". This University was founded in 1906 by Dr. Joaquin V. Gonzalez, who thus turned his dreams into reality. These dreams were summarized by him as follows:

If there is a single reason which can explain the existence of Universities as organisms formed from a combination of various sciences, it is the high moral unity that the sciences imprint upon the character, in showing it that all the sciences share the same destiny, there above, in the sphere of ideas and knowledge of the truth, and here below, in life, the discovery of pathways to happiness, which human society has desperately searched for since its infancy. The highest political mission of the Universities is achieved when this moral unity is transmitted, becomes widespread and stamps its seal on a whole generation and a whole people. The solidarity between science, the teaching faculty, and life in the classroom converts itself just as the primitive sap pervades an entire tree, into an immense latent force which provides society with an even hue and an exuberant robustness.

The University of La Plata was deeply involved in secondary education, understanding that in this stage of youth could be found the key and the basis for the molding of the future man. For this reason we were given a deeply humanistic formation. We should, however, understand that various types of humanism exist and can be defined. Ours included all the ethical demands related to human dignity.

Our professors, with Ezequiel Martinez Estrada and Pedro Henriquez Ureña at the forefront, filled our souls with ideals and utopias. They wanted us to dream, above all, of a solid, unified Latin America, a Magna Patria, as Don Pedro would say, devoted to Social Justice: "If the Magna Patria (the great homeland) is to express its unity, it must do so in the name of Justice, to base the organization of Society on new grounds, which relieve man from the continuous anxiety of hunger to which he is presently condemned by his supposed liberty and the sterile impotence of his newfound slavery, much more anguishing than the old because it affects many more beings and wraps them all in the shadow of a destiny over which they have no control ".

He summoned us then and even now invites us to: "Return to Utopia its human and spiritual nature, strive so that the attempt to establish social reform and economic justice will not be the only limits to our aspirations; ensure that the disappearance of economic tyranny is in concordance with the perfect liberty of man as an individual and as part of society, whose only rules, after neminem laedere, are Reason and Aesthetic Sense. He intended to form a free man, open to the four winds of the spirit.

The fundamental idea of the program elaborated in 1924 was that of forming integral men with solid principles based on deeply humanistic grounds, and who, beyond knowledge of art and science, would once and for all understand that to live in liberty and to respect Justice are the essentials of our lives; that ethics and morals always demand that we f ght for the dignity of man; that respect of and the search for the truth allows us to avoid dogma; that each person has the right to his or her individuality, but is obliged, compromised to participate and to try to improve society; that the great satisfactions derive from the achievements of the spirit attained through free will; that in order to reach these ideals it is necessary to work with passion, endeavor and sacrifice. "

If we had to summarize our activities in the secondary school of the University, we could do no better than to mention some paragraphs from the letter that Don Ezequiel sent to his students after having resigned from his professorships as a result of the authoritarianism of those days, which has more than once taken possession of the governments of our country:

Buenos Aires, July 7, 1945.

To the students of the sixth year of the La Plata National College.

To each and every one of them.

My dear students, my dear friends:

(…)

We truly formed a family in the bosom of a larger family, in the bosom of an even bigger family. And we met simply for reasons of work, of timetables, of duties; that it was so was inevitable because our compromise to meet together arose from our obligation to share that spiritual life which has little to do with College and books.

(…)

You and I had the same teachers in those happy days; I too was a student attending with you the lessons of this prodigious world. Let us not forget it. We all sought, through the organs of thought and feeling, to discover ourselves as men with greater consciousness and in more seasoned plenitude. Those outside our circle thought that we were studying, when in fact we were forming ourselves, correcting ourselves, feeding ourselves on the food which has given us this health of friendship. How could I forget you ? We were all students together, and we lived the same life together in the classroom, which was the only place where it was possible. This -ineffably - is what you owe to me and what I perhaps to a greater extent owe to you, for in addition I obtained infinite satisfaction seeing how you unconsciously penetrated with all the innumerable treasures of your rusty youth, still susceptible to astonishment, into those labyrinths of poetry, novels, and stories in which are hidden the divinities which put heart into us and which teach us to admire, to love, to understand, and to pity. I too penetrated into those labyrinths - I confess it now -with fear, devotion and astonishment. God help me that I will never get to know so much that I will lose my sense of fear, devotion and astonishment at what the spirit can achieve, which is no less marvelous than that achieved by the Earth!

In 1941 I entered the Faculty of Medicine. One hundred and twenty students shared our lives with our Teachers, who transmitted to us scientific knowledge together with the ethical and moral principles which would define our future Professional development. Our University was I believe in agreement with the code of conduct established in the Sixties by our Nobel prizewinner Bernardo Houssay for any University which pretended to be so:

1. Its professors and teachers will dedicate themselves exclusively to Teaching and Research.

2. They will carry out original research and will train investigators.

3. Teaching will be based on the Scientific spirit, that is to say on Research.

4. The men trained in the University will demonstrate their superiority by their technical capacity, their culture, and their code of life.

5. The University will develop intelligence, initiative, independence of judgment, and a deeply felt patriotism which will be rational and enlightened

6. It will actively aid in the formation and advancement of younger colleagues through Fellowships and research grants.

7. There should be frank and direct contact between the Professors, their assistants and the Students. The number of students should be directly related to the academic resources available.

8. The University should possess a modern complete Library, vital and dynamic and not static.

9. Basic teaching in the Sciences should be favored with the best possible resources.

10. There should be an ample spirit of collaboration within the University, a scrupulous cult of Truth, and friendliness and correct treatment between its members. Malice shall not prevail.

To which he added:

"We will progress only if the universities enjoy complete autonomy. It is indispensable that the governments which subsidize them or support them do so without interfering in the least way with their teaching program or the designation of their personnel.

There must exist complete liberty in research, discussion and expression. No conclusion or scientific orientation may be dictated by public bodies. No scientific hypothesis or doctrine may be proscribed or prescribed. Our universities must develop themselves free of politics, prejudice or religious or racial dogma.

It is necessary to impart a moral education, for there is nothing more fearful than science without conscience. It is indispensable that the upper class receives a basic intellectual and scientific education. "

Without doubt, education in Argentina has been in decline, particularly over the last fifty years during which civilian and military governments have alternated. A single example suffices: the governor of the province of Cordoba during the last military regime declared that: "Modern mathematics are subversive ".

Our society and the world in general is living through a very special moment. I am absolutely in agreement with Jean-Jacques Salomon who said that: "The industrial revolution forges ahead without having found any short cut to overcome the fundamental problems of development: hunger, unemployment, health care and education. " The present stage of post-modernity has been clearly qualified by Ulrich Beck as "the stage of organized irresponsibility". The communications media, especially television which uses images as an educative base, have flooded us with their promotion of material values giving us to understand that our existence is justified only through possession, power, and pleasure. This message has unfortunately invaded the souls of the majority of our young people.

It is important to recognize that education is not restricted just to schools, colleges, and Universities. It should be understood that we are all educators. Each act of our daily lives has its implications, sometimes of significance. We should therefore try to teach by our example.

Notwithstanding these concepts, primordial importance should be given to social change which has so far failed to emerge. We are without doubt submerged in a materialistic, hypocritical and dehumanized society, which has been developing slowly but steadily and which appears to have no limits to its appetites. All means are justified to increase power and pleasure through economic gain. It is of no importance that the majority of the population is excluded and survives in misery and lack of welfare.

We must construct a new society in which democracy is definitively combined with social justice, putting an end to unjustified privileges. Education must contribute to significantly shorten the time scale. The baffle is hard and will continue to be so. The enemies to be defeated are very powerful. Any effort to inculcate noble and virtuous principles will be in vain if, on passing through the classroom doors, our young people come face to face with a society which has distorted traditional values.

In order to construct this new society, the following ethical principles could help us in our work as educators:

1. Honesty. No project is possible without honor. The cult of truth is a priority.

2. The defense of Liberty is an essential condition for the development of Man. As a consequence:

3. We must fight for the consolidation of participative democracy with a fairer distribution of riches.

4. This will only be possible through the same social justice which Henriquez Urena held to be one of the most important ethical principles.

5. We must show solidarity. We all have a right to our own individuality, but at the same time we are obliged to participate if we wish to better our society. As a result:

6. We must be Responsible. To our individual responsibility we must add our family and collective responsibilities. Put an end to escapism. We need to have a sense of commitment.

7. Our lives should be dedicated principally to the fight for the dignity of man, understanding that:

8. We wish to have a better life here on Earth.

9. We must struggle to achieve World Unity, remembering that: "If the Magna Patria (the great commonwealth) is to express its unity, it must do so in the name of Justice, to base the organization of Society on new grounds, which relieve man from the continuous anxiety of hunger to which he is presently condemned by his supposed liberty".

10. We must remember that nothing is achieved without effort. Let us recall once more that "meanwhile, we have to work with Faith and Hope every day. My friends: TO WORK"

We must all commit ourselves to say:

NO to corruption

NO to violence

NO to drugs

NO to prejudices, especially of a religious nature

NO to authoritarianism

NO to the arms race

NO to pollution

In conclusion, education should be directed towards the formation of man in all the sublime plenitude of human nature.

SCIENCE

Professor Houssay tells us that: "science is born of the desire to know the truth, which is a desire inherent to man as a rational being He searches for those truths which may be tested and demonstrated. Science is a fundamental human value in itself, because it enlightens the spirit and provides and ever more exact knowledge. In addition it modifies our concept of the world and of mankind, teaching new and better ways of reasoning In the face of the difficulties which exist in the verification of the truth, science strives to establish its exact demonstration with an absolute degree of tolerance towards sincere opinions in the incessant process of serene and well-mannered discussion".

It is convenient to reflect upon the words of Houssay because they contain concepts which will help us to clear up an unfortunate misunderstanding which confuses science with its technological consequences.

Houssay states that science is a fundamental human value in itself. In effect, science is an ultimate objective and as such does not require justification; it is one of the highest manifestations of spiritual activity because it is an expression of the creative intellect, the supreme form of our human condition. In this sense, we may recall the famous phrase of the great German mathematician Jacobi, who sustained that the study of mathematics should be made compulsory "for the honor of the human spirit". Jacobi classified abstract thought and the creative soaring of the intellect as the reverence which the honor of our spirit deserves. Nothing less than the crystalline beauty of algebra or the capacity to explore the formal abstractions of syntactic systems suffices that act of creation which allows us to experience to the full the dimensions of our human condition.

It is just this quality, this redeemability, of science which places it beyond criticism.

Those who far too often confuse science with its technological offshoots commit the blind error of judging that which is not open to accusation. Science is neither guilty nor innocent. It is the expression of a necessity inherent to being human, closely related to a higher function of its intelligent nature: the capacity to create.

Its practical consequences, and those of technology, may well be classified as good or bad: it is the use to which knowledge is put which leads to such classification, not knowledge itself.

It should now be clear that when we refer to the connections between science and development, we are referring to the technological consequences as a byproduct of science and not to science itself, which is part of the cultural patrimony of mankind dedicated to the service of higher objectives such as truth and beauty. However, without science it is impossible to achieve these objectives.

That the objective be good or bad is independent of science, but we can be sure that the ethical content of applied science is a major determinant of the outcome, transforming it into a byproduct of science itself such as philosophical analysis. The more that science is allowed to participate in the control of its product – knowledge the more we can be sure that the outcome will be allied to goodness.

Houssay himself assured this when he outlined the duties of science:

1. To apply itself to the material and spiritual welfare of mankind.

. To ensure that its benefits are applied as rapidly as possible to the greatest number of beings.

. To help less advanced societies to perfect their means and better their human resources.

. To foster brotherhood and peaceful cooperation between men so that wars and oppression finally disappear.

Although the primary compromise of science is intellectual, we must not lay aside its technical and moral implications. It is beyond doubt that science has given birth to the majority of the new technologies, and that technological development requires new bodies of knowledge above all in basic science.

Scientific development has reached levels which surprise us almost daily. We cannot deny that this development, which recognizes no limits, has permitted great changes to take place in society within a single life span. At the same time we must admit that the evolution of society has been unable to match the speed of technological innovation. This innovation has not always been positive, as witnessed by the social and human consequences of incidents such as thalidomide and Chernobyl, and has not always been equitable. As Riccardo Petrella points out, the increased life expectancy resulting from the application of technology, particularly in the industrialized countries, is accompanied by terrifying statistics:

More than a thousand million persons live in absolute poverty. This is more than three times the population of the European Community.

Around nine hundred million adults are illiterate.

Approximately two thousand million people are deprived of potable water.

A hundred million persons have no roof over their heads, equivalent to the combined populations of France, Spain, and Belgium.

Around eight hundred million people go hungry.

There are a hundred and fifty million undernourished children below the age of five.

~ Fourteen million children die every day before reaching their 95th birthday.

Petrella goes on to say:

"The world is a megasystem with a circulating capital valued in five thousand billion dollars, fifty five thousand aircraft in flight every day, four hundred million cars on the roads consuming three billion barrels of petroleum per year, and yet we are incapable of providing potable water for no less than two thousand million persons. Each day, today included, one thousand seven hundred and fifty two children below the age of if teen die from diseases related to lack of pure water. We can create forty artificial lakes in the Nevada mountains to provide fresh water for five hundred and sixty thousand swimming pools in the Californian desert, but we cannot provide water for those who desperately need it".

He reminds us that over the next thirty years, the global society must confront:

an important increase in world population to around eight thousand million people in the year 2020

the urgent problem of sustainable development under the pressure of severe environmental restrictions

the growing basic needs and hopes of around five thousand million persons living in the poorer parts of the world towards the year 2020

growing political instability.

We must not forget the profound ecological changes occurring in our planet. In

August of 1993 the ecology ministers of four German provinces launched a dramatic

call on the basis of the following information from the United Nations:

Every Day:

one hundred animal and vegetable species are extinguished

eighty six million tons of earth are flooded and dragged into the oceans

fifty five thousand hectares of tropical forests are cut down

deserts extend by twenty thousand hectares

a hundred million tons of waste gases are discharged into the atmosphere

more arable ground is lost than can be reclaimed in a thousand days of work.

Consequently, as a simple question of survival, it would seem logical to remind ourselves of the important principle of the social responsibility of technology, which was formulated as long ago as 1939 when John D. Bernal published his book entitled "The Social Function of Science" representing a powerful intellectual call for the utilization of technology in the betterment of society.

The State should strongly organize and invest in science, and not just in science for the sake of science but directed towards producing technology in order to save mankind from centuries of scarce resources, sickness and wars. As we have already said, we believe that the expression science for the sake of science does not make sense to us for science is the justification of its own existence. We are, however, in agreement with Bernal in the orientation of technology towards the ends he proposes.

Following the Second World War he published "A World Without War" setting out his own experiences of having worked on strategic technology in the Admiralty. He reiterates that the developments achieved in technology represent for our age a previously unheard-of range of possibilities for the liberation of mankind.

Another writer, Hector Capuscio, has commented that: "the biggest disgrace oJ today's world is the growing gulf between rich and poor, between the few and the many". Land, energy, natural resources, industry, education, science and technology: each set out with numbers, statistics and suggestions. He was convinced that it is possible for science to achieve a complete transformation of the material basis of human society at a global level. Not as a charitable gesture but for Justice and the well-being of all. The problem was to help man to help himself, distributing the right quantity to each one and the technical information to enable each country to optimize its human and material resources in the construction of a modern economy. "The march of events places before us with growing insistence problems relative to the appropriate use of technology in Society".In agreement with Jean-Jacques Salomon,it is clear that technology requires a growing input from the social sciences, which must play a crucial role in the formulation and implementation of technological policies and programs to respond to different challenges.

It is also clear that we are faced with a new scientific-technological-ethical paradigm as pointed out by Carlos Martinez Vidal, the purpose of which is to eliminate the exploitation and subjection of man and to center its emphasis on his well-being in the context of sustained and integral development which respects and does not destroy the medium surrounding him: his soil, his water, his air.

We must ensure that productivity, solidarity and social equity are compatible, searching for a dynamic equilibrium. This concept is beginning to make its voice heard in the more developed countries. For example, the Office of Technology Assessment of the United States Congress is concerned about the social evolution of technology. The same is happening in the European Community with its program for Forecasting and Assessment in the Field of Science and Technology.

In the face of the consumer society, promotion of the social importance of technology represents a colossal challenge when we remember that the wealthiest 20% of the world is appropriating ever more riches for its own use and enjoyment.

We must consider that in 1960 that percentage was just 30.1% and that in 1991 it roseto91.1%.

We see the same phenomenon in Latin America. On May 5, 1994, the World Bank reported that in Brazil, the wealthiest 20% of the population controls over 67% of the riches, whereas in Argentina this control is exercised over 52% of the available riches. Even in other Latin American countries, these figures reach 50 to 70%.

The distribution of incomes follows the same pattern. In my own country, the poorest 10% of the population receive less than 2% of the total income, with over 35% going to the top docile.

It is very difficult for me to understand what the United Nations has clearly demonstrated: last year the developing countries spent the alarming sum of one hundred and twenty five thousand million dollars in military purchases!

It is evident that science and education have a tremendous challenge to meet, and society a great deal to reflect upon, in the present age.

BIOETHICS

The neologism bioethics appeared approximately twenty-five years ago, as a consequence of an unprecedented linkage between science and ethics in this technological era. What now matters is not only the concept of science, but above all, the problem of conscience. Ultimately, bioethics is the systematic study of human conduct in fields related to life and health care. Above all, conduct is examined in the light of principles and moral values.

I would like to refer to two fundamental aspects that will demonstrate the importance of bioethics. The first of them is the ecological catastrophe. Jose Alberto Mainetti has well defined it: "The problem of environment represents the greatest challenge for humanity on the threshold of the third millennium. The threat of an ecological cataclysm is replacing the nuclear holocaust as the most terrible spectre lying in wait for civilization. Man is obliged to utter a mea culpa for the devastation of the earth, the exhaustion of natural resources and the deterioration of the biosphere, its cause being the industrial exploitation of the planet led on by science and technology in the service of the modern idea of progress. "

"Man reveals himself as a devastator of nature. The ecological catastrophe has gained priority over atomic conflagration as a planetary threat at the end of this century. If Hiroshima was the sin, the environmental crisis is the punishment, the exile from paradise. "

Industrial technology is responsible over the last two centuries for an unprecedented pollution and scarcity of resources. The destruction of the ecosystem occupies a prominent place on the planetary map of the greatest dangers facing environmental health.

The ethics of utility and consumerism is questioned as an ecocidal lifestyle, because * leads to the anarchic proliferation of de-stabilizing artificial ecosystems. Only ecological knowledge can oppose the crisis, by means of a radical change in our attitude towards nature. It is necessary to develop, as a new utopia, an ecological civilization who would imply a novel political, economic and social project in postmodern humanity. This is one of the fundamental challenges of education and science in our times.

The second important subject is that of biotechnology, since man has the possibility of transforming himself and controlling his biological evolution. Mainetti refers to it appropriately: the revolutionary nature of today's biology is particularly appreciated in genetic technology, which represents a new form of man's intervention in nature. Since the Neolithic revolution, humanity has constantly induced genetic changes in plants and animals by means of traditional breeding methods. But with genetic engineering, the barrier of species has been surpassed in order to make inherited information compatible without using the normal methods of transmission, thus making it possible to interchange genetic material between different species.

This power to manipulate the elements of life and the will to control evolution and transform himself, turns man into Pygmalion, —suggested by Mainetti— the misogynous sculptor who fell in love with the female statue he had created, and with the help of Venus gave it life and obtained its love.

In the next century, one of the fundamental subjects to consider is that of the human applications of biotechnology, such as the Human Genome project. Hopefully, the Human Genome Organization (HUGO), composed at present of forty-two scientists, will provide a discussion forum for the ethical, social, commercial and legal debates related to this new adventure, whose objective is to map our own genes. If sensible criteria are employed, the advances of genetic engineering may prove valuable for mankind's future.

Time does not permit us to analyze transgenic manipulation applied to the production of seeds, especially wheat, corn, sunflower, soya, etc., which will allow us to increase crop density and decrease hunger in the world. The same will happen with transgenic animals (investigations in this field are well advanced in some countries), which will permit, among other things, organ transplantation coming from animals with human genes. I am sure that, once achieved, this will cause a shock not only in the realm of science, but also because the social and religious implications will definitely become subjects of discussion.

Let us be optimistic and expect that biotechnology be encompassed in the setting of the moral principles which, as we have repeatedly manifested, must rule the development of science.

DEVELOPMENT

Undoubtedly, education is the fundamental basis for scientific development and the progress of peoples.

Once again, we will insist on the relationship between science and development. In this regard, it is convenient to remember that when speaking about science, we should not necessarily link it with technology. Science, like art, is in itself a final objective: it represents the most elevated activities of the human spirit.

By contrast, when we speak about development we must refer to science, because in its absence no creation of knowledge occurs and, in turn, without knowledge there is no way to transform reality.

In a paper presented to the Conrad Adenauer Foundation about "The role of science in countries pursuing modernization", our own group clearly defined the role of basic sciences in the assembly line of development. In this regard, it was shown that the scientific community dedicated to basic sciences represents not only the power plant where knowledge is generated, but also (and most importantly) the guarantee that the human resources transferred to the assembly line of development have reached the highest standards of capacity and skill through their training in scientific thinking.

Those who simply "copy" technology and lack that generator of knowledge which guarantees the transfer of human resources, are condemned to remain in a condition of dependence on the foundry which first the technologies they copied.

In 1988 Robert Lucas made a valuable contribution by analyzing diverse parameters of economic growth and emphasized the importance of quality and training of the workforce, recognizing this human capital as a significant variable. Education thus acquires a primordial role if we try to make advances in production and in the incorporation of new technologies.

Toffler reiterates that knowledge has become a prime resource in a modern economy, the State of Israel being a demonstrative example. Its people have transformed a desert into an orchard and a wilderness into an advanced society.

This transformation has been actively encouraged, it has not happened by chance. This small country has managed to establish a gross national product in excess of seventy thousand million dollars, invests 9% of this sum in education and over 2% in research and development - a level comparable with that of the United States, Japan and Germany. This shows how important it is to regard educational and scientific development as cornerstones of a nation's growth. The case of Israel should be taken as a model for us in Latin America, where the statistics fall appallingly short of the figures just mentioned, and where we continue to depend on the income from bulk production of unprocessed materials, despite the analysis carried out in 1993 by Manuel Herrera showing that none of the countries whose wealth at the beginning of this century was based on raw materials continues to occupy the same place today.

The economies of the majority of Latin American countries have been in constant decline over this period, which has seen economic crises, precarious national budgets, increase of the international debts and continuous political problems which have severely interfered with sustained development. As a result, education has suffered at all levels. To be honest, we still have not solved even the problem of primary education. In Argentina, only 60% of pupils complete the primary cycle and in some rural areas this figure drops to as low as 20%. Data as recent as 1993

indicate that 24% of adults are illiterate and that 70% of the pupils in the secondary school cannot interpret what they have read.

Our Universities are overloaded with students thanks to unrestricted admission, inadequate infrastructure and the absence of organized planning for the development of a modern university system. We dedicate only 4% of our GNP to education and even the plans of the present government to increase this figure by 20% per annum over the next five years will result in a shortfall. Much bigger sums must be invested if we are really interested in solving this grave problem.

Money, of course, is not the only solution. We must educate or even "re-educate" the so-called governing class. Houssay pointed out that in the Hispanic world, the "caudillos" or "mandones" by which we refer to a species of feudal lord, are by nature antagonistic towards the intellectual. They are intolerant of independent opinion, fearful of criticism, and envious of the more educated man. How often have our universities fallen foul of these men when they rise to authoritarian public office. Houssay has compared their acts to a national suicide.

Jorge Sabato, one of the most distinguished scientists in our country, in his book entitled "Science and technology in the future development of Latin America" showed that science and technology in our countries exist as a series of elements without formal interconnection and so cannot be described as a system. He went on to describe his well-known triangle: on the vertex, the government (G), on one side, the productive structure (E) and on the other one, the scientific and technological infrastructure (I). The "G" vertex performs a constructive action as related to doctrine, political strategy, assignation of resources and planning. The main quality of "I" vertex is its creative capacity and that of "E" vertex is related to its productive capacity. Without coordination between these elements through mutual participation, progress is impossible. Israel has shown us how this can be done, and has risen to be a prime example of what Azpiazu and Notchef refer to as "innovative countries" in which basic and applied sciences and technology are given priority.

The Latin American countries have taken the opposite pathway by copying and adapting technologies too late, thus meriting the description of "late adapters".

Another class of country is that of a creative imitator, such as Japan, which through an accelerated learning process transforms itself into a serious competitor.

Latin America has still not appreciated the quality inherent in basic science, which has been summarized by Roberto Perazzo as the following:

1. It is the precursor of rational and systematic thought by opposing concepts based on magic.

2. It is the precursor of professional and technical training with an emphasis on creative attitudes.

3. It provides knowledge which makes possible applications of significant technological interest.

4. Scientific research creates a demand for new instruments and developments which fuel the appearance of new technologies.

The benefits of this approach are exemplified by the discoveries of Luis Pasteur whose starting point was the study of asymmetries in crystals and the process of fermentation. These observations led him to into the field of microbiology, and to set out the rules of asepsis and antisepsis, the invention of vaccination, and the basis of procedures which permit modern surgery.

It is only through the basic sciences that creativity may be exercised, stimulated by the practice of independent solution of problems. Without creativity, we cannot even begin to consider development.

A good example is to be found in the activities of Vannevar Bush who formed part of the Roosevelt administration in the United States at the end of the war. He developed the basis of a durable scientific and technological program by establishing the guidelines for a "linear innovation model" in which the basic sciences formed the first link in the chain, and went on to propose the funding of twenty four thousand studentships and nine hundred postgraduate grants at a cost of thirty million dollars.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have tried to present some of the problems which I have lived with for many years now. Any university graduate has the moral obligation of contributing as much as possible to the improvement of his society in addition to carrying out his specific duties. This has been the only justification of my lecture.

Once again I have done this in the setting of a forum, in a country which merits my deepest respect. I have had to talk about some of the problems of Latin America because, like Agustin Alvarez, I believe that individuals and peoples unable to recognize their own defects, are unable to correct them.

This is why I have had to analyze some disagreeable subjects but, like Echeverria, one of our great thinkers, I believe that in Latin America we need to regenerate —and not simply reorganize—ourselves. We must get to the depth of the facts.

I must confess that Latin America pains my soul. Thanks to my teaching activities, I have travelled all over it on countless occasions in these last thirty years. It has been a long time since I last visited a museum, a magnificent church or a monument. When I have some free time left, I walk along the city streets or I go into the countryside to be amongst the people. The images I see are always similar: a minority enjoys all the privileges, while the majority of the population lives in poverty and abandonment. It is necessary to understand that education, above all, plays and will continue to play a fundamental role in the changes that will unavoidably arrive.

These problems are not present only in Latin America. I think they are universal, because even in the United States millions of people live undernourished and without appropriate medical care. I would say, in order to demonstrate this point, that each city has its own ghetto and, unfortunately, social intolerance has increased showing that we have hardly progressed in our intellectual development.

Please understand me, I have always believed that future reality is built on ideals and utopias. Undoubtedly, to dream is a fertile activity. I would cease to exist if I were not confronted, both within and outside my profession, by challenges related to the ethical development of man. As Joan Manuel Serrat says: "without utopias, life is nothing but a long and sad dress-rehearsal for death. "

I would like to ask especially the younger people to understand that material things are temporary: only ideals last forever, and within this context, the battle-cry should be: education and scientific development for a society in which social justice is the priority.

FINALLY:

I cannot conclude this presentation without quoting from one of my favourite writers, Henry David Thoreau. In 1854, he wrote:

"Time is but the stream I go a-fishing in. I drink at it; but while I drink I see the sandy bottom and detect how shallow it is. Its thin current slides away, but eternity remains. I would drink deeper, and fish, in the sky, whose bottom is pebbly with stars. "

I think our society is reaching the time of fundamental change. I hope our minds will be able to fish brilliant stars, free of any prejudice, to build a new world for the generations to come.