The British physicist John Ziman once puckishly claimed that a scientist knows as much about science as a fish about hydrodynamics. This does not mean he cannot swim. Only, when the waters get polluted, even fish have to turn practical philosophers. Ziman was making a subtle point that knowledge about knowledge is a self-reflective and cybernetic exercise, which provides the wisdom that keeps science as a form of knowledge in place. One must note two key assumptions here. Understanding science needs a meta-narrative and, secondly, science, rather than being equated to knowledge, is seen as one variant of it. It is a scenario that provides exciting possibilities of viewing knowledge in terms of new metaphors. This is precisely what a little travelling circus of seminars moving quietly across Delhi, Bangalore and Hyderabad did under the auspices of the University of Sussex. The group created a site for a debate, a conversation, a theatre to debate science with scientists, science studies professionals and civil society. The debate took as its basic text an important but flawed document, “Taking Scientific Knowledge Seriously.” This document, a report to the EU, did precisely what our knowledge commission failed to do. It took knowledge seriously.
Rethinking science
by Shiv Viswanathan, New Indian Express, 20 February, 2009

Nanowerk.com, 01st June 2005

A Tiny Primer on Nano-scale Technologies ...and The Little Bang Theory

A basic introduction to nanotechnology and its implications by the ETC Group (or Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration). ETC is dedicated to the conservation and sustainable advancement of cultural and ecological diversity and human rights. To this end, ETC Group supports socially responsible developments of technologies useful to the poor and marginalized and it addresses international governance issues and corporate power.

[ C.eldoc1/KICS/050601zzz1B.pdf]