The Guardian (London) May 17, 2000, Guardian Home Pages; Pg. 1
HEADLINE: Angry Charles warns scientists of disaster
BYLINE: John Vidal and James Meek

     Prince Charles's simmering anger with the direction of some modern
science will tonight blow into a philosophical storm as he argues that the
only way to avoid environmental catastrophe is for humankind to rediscover
an urgent 'sense of the sacred'.
     In a Reith lecture, to be broadcast on Radio 4 tonight, he will
confront scientific materialism, politicians and business leaders to argue
that it is because of humanity's 'inability or refusal to accept the
existence of a guiding hand that nature has come to be regarded as a system
that can be engineered for our own convenience and in which anything that
happens can be fixed by technology and human ingenuity'.
     He will add: 'We need to rediscover a reverence for the natural world,
irrespective of its usefulness to ourselves, to become more aware of the
relationship between God, man and creation.'
     The lecture takes swipes at biotechnology, the government's
modernising zeal, and economic globalisation  and warns that it is only by
employing 'both the intuitive and rational halves of our own nature that we
will live up to the sacred trust that has been placed in us by our
creator'.
     He asks: 'If literally nothing is held sacred anymore, what is there
to prevent us treating our entire world as some 'great laboratory of life'
with potentially disastrous longterm consequences?'
     But the prince is careful to build bridges between modern science and
the sacred. 'We need to restore the balance between the heartfelt reason of
instinctive wisdom and the rational insights of scientific analysis.
Neither is much use without the other. Only by rediscovering the essential
unity and order of the living and spiritual world and by bridging the gap
between cynical secularism and the timelessness of traditional religion
will we avoid the disintegration of our environment.'
     The Prince of Wales has weighed into the debate over genetically
modified foods before, but this time his attack on the scientific approach
is broader and deeper. Some of his critics are likely to interpret his
remarks as an assault on the whole medical and agricultural revolution
being ushered in by the new era of genetics.
     His fears over GM crops may have inspired his criticism, but his
lecture is a cry against excessive scientific rationalism in general. His
belief that tampering with nature is an affront to God, whom he refers to
throughout his lecture as the creator, is spelled out more explicitly than
in previous statements.
     The 22-minute speech draws on green gurus including Fritz Shumacher
and Rachel Car son, natural theologians including Philip Sherrard, and
radical economists such as Herman Daly, formerly of the World Bank. Last
night it was well received by British environmental leaders, who are
increasingly at odds with what they see as the fundamentalism of some
modern science.
     Peter Melchett, director of Greenpeace, said: 'It's long overdue that
someone pointed out how bereft and barren of humanity are those people who
claim they are acting on the basis of 'sound science'. They say in effect
that culture, society, values and religion don't exist.'
     Charles Secrett, director of Friends of the Earth, said the speech
would be a wakeup call to politicians and business leaders who thought
nature was 'a piece of machinery'.
     'He is reminding us that nature is something wondrous and beautiful
and that we have to learn that humility to develop a truly sustainable
relationship with nature,' he said.
     Jonathon Porritt, a close friend of the prince's who has also argued
that science today is philosophically unable to address the challenges of
sustainable development, said: 'There is an overwhelming consensus that
everything can be sorted by 'good science'. But it cannot be a panacea. It
is a part of the mix but not sufficient in itself.'
     The prince's words provoked a strong response from Richard Dawkins,
the zoologist and awardwinning science writer. 'Far from being demeaning to
human spiritual values, scientific rationalism is the crowning glory of the
human spirit,' he said. 'Of course you can use the products of science to
do bad things, but you can use them to do good things, too.'
     Others were scathing. 'He's attacking everything that has been done by
mankind in the past 100,000 years,' said Julian Morris of the Institute of
Economic Affairs.
     'Man should consider man foremost. Does Prince Charles think we ought
to go back to the point where we are at the whim of nature? In Genesis, man
is called on to take charge of nature. This seems to be akin to some pagan
love of an earth goddess.'

POWRÓT