As a result of the ban, some scientists went overseas. Others shook their heads. Citizens all over the nation—particularly those waiting for organ transplants and many with terminal illnesses—were disappointed. The decision seemed to uneasily prioritize religion over science, personal belief over greater good, close-mindedness over possibility. The conflict of values seemed terminal.
But then, four years later, scientists announced that they had begun to find ways to reprogram cells. Skin cells, for example, could be manipulated to perform other functions—much the way embryonic stem cells can be grown to perform different functions. The biotechnology was and is still not yet complete, but it offers hope that achieving the original goal may yet be possible--and in a way that encourages scientists while also satisfying the pro-life community.
While I don’t condone Bush’s actions, I no longer condemn them. In retrospect, what impresses me about Bush’s response is that while he kiboshed embryonic stem cell work, he pushed and funded scientists to develop solutions that avoided the moral dilemma. (This is at the cost, of course, of the patients who have suffered in the meantime—and this raises its own moral dilemmas.)
There remain myriad ethical lenses which both celebrate and decry Bush’s actions. My interest in this post, however, is not in the ethics of the situation, but in the way his ban pushed scientists to improvise.
~
Restrictions inspire innovation. Limits catalyze creativity. Ask a friend who speaks German to say something in German, and she’ll probably look blankly at you. Ask her to say a typical greeting, and she’ll more likely respond. Similarly, ask a musician to write a song, and he may hit a wall, but ask him to write something happy, and he’ll likely be able to whip something up.
In fact, the greater the restrictions, the more remarkable and interesting the result usually is. Ask your German-speaking friend to act out a conversation between two strangers waiting in line at a coffee shop and the second person in line is running late, and you’ll likely hear some authentic German flavor. Or challenge the musician to write a happy song in a minor key, and you’ll likely inspire a rich piece of music. Providing the results may not be easy, but it will likely be better.
The most dynamic people know this. The best businesses know this. Restrictions compel resourcefulness, which compels creativity and innovation. The biologists who are developing the skin cell/stem cell solution demonstrate scientific resourcefulness when faced with pro-life restrictions. Barack Obama’s health care plan innovatively reconciles the Democratic principle of universality with the Republican principle of choice. Dr. Seuss famously and impressively took to the challenge of writing a book with fifty or fewer words—and he produced “Green Eggs and Ham.” Pressing herself to write a song one night while waiting for Cat Stevens to pick her up for a date, Carly Simon wrote “Anticipation.”
In every case, working with the forces that seem to limit us--time, money, opposition, resources--also press us for something new. And usually better.
Post inspired by: self-repairing rubber
0 comments:
Post a Comment