Nine Northwest salmon and steelhead stocks gained protected status under the federal Endangered Species Act. As scientists' work affects public decision-making, motives are inspected as closely as methods. This semi-slanderous process saps public confidence in all science, some scientists fear. Scientists, they say, never should become advocates or opponents in the political process, where nonscientific values often are used to distort what science knows and conceal what science doesn't yet grasp. Scientists who venture into the policy arena risk having themselves labeled as unobjective and their work as unscientific, Mary Jo Nye demonstrated in a lecture two months ago to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Some people feel morally obliged to take such risks.
That was the case after World War II, when scientists differed over how atomic research and development should play out in Cold War policy. Linus Pauling, the Oregon Agricultural College graduate and chemist awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1963, was the most conspicuous of this breed. Pauling and others disconcerted colleagues by bringing their arguments to mass audiences instead of limiting themselves to scholarly journals. They spoke out as individuals, often forgoing traditional semi-anonymous panels, committees and manifestoes. They used their scientific reputations to speak on matters outside their fields.