Few people outside his field would have heard of Daniel Amit, an Israeli physicist whose specialism is the applications of statistical field theories to neural networks. According to Les Schaffer, "his 1983 textbook, Modeling Brain Function : The World of Attractor Neural Networks, is notable on two grounds, one that it is well written, and second the bio on the back cover mentions directly that Amit is involved with Palestinian Solidarity issues, unusual for a science text in this 'empireless' age."
Having read about him in an article by James Rothenberg, I decided to find out a little more about him. Here is some of his correspondence following the US attack on Iraq in March 2003. He is clearly not the kind of scientist - all too many, alas! - who believes the personal and professional ought to be kept in separate water-tight compartments. I find my own views resonate strongly with his, particularly after having argued - against some of my school administration - that this is impossible in the teaching profession.
=========================
Interchange of letters between Prof. Daniel Amit and an American scientific journal
April, 2003
----------------------------------------
Dr. Daniel Amit
Univ. di Roma, La Sapienza
Ple Aldo Moro 2
00185 Roma, ITALY
Electronic URL-Download Referral from Physical Review E
Code: EA8932
Title: Transitions in oscillatory dynamics of two connected neurons with excitatory synapses
Received 08 January 2003
Dear Dr. Amit:
We would appreciate your review of this manuscript, which has been submitted to Physical Review E. This message is the COMPLETE REFERRAL. No hardcopy will be sent unless requested.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Daniel Amit"
To: "Physical Review E"
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: Review_request AMIT EA8932 Roudi
I will not at this point correspond with any american institution. Some of us have lived through 1939.
Daniel Amit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Martin Blume"
To: "Daniel Amit"
Subject: your email to the American Physical Society
Date: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 10:31 PM
Dear Dr. Amit,
We have received your email with your decision not to review a paper for us in light of American actions in the middle east. We recognize that reviewing manuscripts is a voluntary activity, one that you perform as a service to the physics community, and we thank you for your efforts.
Given the voluntary nature of your participation we of course respect your decision to cease, and have made an indication in our database so that no further papers will be sent to you for review until you inform us otherwise.
We ask, however, that you consider the following in hopes that in the not too distant future you will decide to review for us again.
We regard science as an international enterprise and we do our best to put aside political disagreements in the interest of furthering the pursuit of scientific matters. We have never used other than scientific criteria in judging the acceptability of a paper for publication, without regard to the country of origin of the author.
We have done this even in cases where some of us have disagreed strongly with the policies of that country, and we will continue this practice. We believe it is essential that all parties involved make every effort to separate social and political differences from their participation in scientific research and publication. The pursuit of scientific knowledge needs to transcend such issues.
Sincerely,
Martin Blume
Editor-in-Chief
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Daniel Amit"
To: "Martin Blume"
Date: Wednesday, April 09, 2003
Dr Blume, Editor in Chief
American Physical Society
Dear Dr Blume
Thank you for you letter of April 8. I would have liked to be able to share the honorable sentiments you express in your letter as well as your optimism in the future role of science and the scientific community. To be frank, and with much sadness and pain, after 40 years of activity and collaboration, I find very little reason for such optimism.
What we are watching today, I believe, is a culmination of 10-15 years of mounting barbarism of the American culture the world over, crowned by the achievements of science and technology as a major weapon of mass destruction. We are witnessing man hunt and wanton killing of the type and scale not seen since the raids on American Indian populations, by a superior technological power of inferior culture and values. We see no corrective force to restore the insanity, the self-righteousness and the lack of respect for human life (civilian and military) of another race.
Science cannot stay neutral, especially after it has been so cynically used in the hands of the inspectors to disarm a country and prepare it for decimation by laser guided cluster bombs. No, science of the American variety has no recourse. I, personally, cannot see myself anymore sharing a common human community with American science. Unfortunately, I also belong to a culture of a similar spiritual deviation (Israel), and which seems to be equally incorrigible.
In desperation I cannot but turn my attention to other tragic periods in which major societies, some with claims to fundamental contributions to culture and science, have deviated so far as to be relegated to ostracism and quarantine. At this point I think American society should be considered in this category. I have no illusions of power, as to the scope and prospect of my attitude.
But, the minor role of my act and statement is a simple way of affirming that in the face of a growing enormity which I consider intolerable, I will exercise my own tiny act of disobedience to be able to look straight into the eyes of my grandchildren and my students and say that I did know.
With regard
Daniel Amit
PS: I intend to distribute our exchange as much as possible. I authorize and pray that you do the same.
Nature 423, 683 (2003) © Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Why should we help politicians to wage war?
Sir – Your Editorial "Hope for best, prepare for worst" (Nature 423, 101;
2003) was characteristically illuminating. Given the depressing situation
in which the world has been left following the war on Iraq, it is quite
reassuring to learn that a strong competitor to President Bush for the
title of 'world's scariest' has surfaced in the person of North Korean
President Kim Jong-Il.
The Editorial recommends that we scientists should pay special attention
and search our own consciences: "scientists in East Asia should be thinking
about how they might be involved". The good news, apparently, is that US
scientists, "since the Manhattan Project", have become engaged in the
international military thinking of their governments. The new danger, you
say, is that, in Asia, "scientists are adopting the attitude that war is
something for the government to deal with" and adopting the view "don't let
political considerations skew your objectivity; focus on your research; be
driven by pure curiosity".
You state that American scientists, since the Manhattan Project, have
behaved ethically (if not always successfully) in trying to influence the
use that is made of their work. Could you give some examples? Was the
large-scale defoliation in Vietnam a success for biologists or ecologists?
Is the use of depleted uranium, now so popular in US munitions (for
example, in Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq), an ethical achievement by
physicists? Is the dropping of 2,000-pound bombs in residential
neighbourhoods due to "leading chemists"?
It is unfortunate that you present India and Pakistan as positive examples
of the involvement of scientists in military development. Both countries
parade nuclear weapons in the service of rather unbecoming nationalistic
and bigoted politics. No dissent by "leading scientists" has become
publicly known. And should one mention Israel?
It would also have been helpful had you explained the advantage of
involvement by "leading researchers" in military circles. Is this necessary
because of the need for ever more sophisticated weapons? Or is it because
non-leading scientists may have less ethical backbone? Indeed, could the
threat of participation by "those much less qualified" have led to a
somewhat better score?
The main disadvantage you ascribe to Asian scientists' unwillingness to be
involved in military work — since "military preparations require
science-based research and development, from the analysis of an enemy's
capabilities to the design and production of weapons" — may be their
inability to provide the sophisticated tools that are necessary to inspect
and destroy the weapons of some future enemy, and then to decimate the
presumed enemy with laser-guided cluster bombs.
Luckily, the threat posed by the attitudes of Asian scientists is reduced,
mainly because — following the wars on Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq —
international institutions such as the United Nations, the United Nations
Security Council and the Geneva Conventions are no longer available for
destruction. Should the current 30 months of war on Palestinian autonomy be
thrown into the deal? Was it perhaps the 'ivory tower' attitude of Asian
institutions of science and culture which prevented any sign of alarm being
shown at the devastation of international order? This silence has been
particularly deafening in contrast to the persistent and principled stands
that have been taken by all the western religious institutions, at their
highest levels.
There is in fact a strong case for the opposite attitude, for lauding those
who carry on research for "the glory of God", beautifully articulated by
Sir Michael Atiyah in his address concluding his term as president of the
Royal Society in November 1995. "In this semi-political world ... we [the
scientific community] are in danger of losing our way and our identity. The
scientific ethos becomes increasingly hard to discern. Scientists are too
often thought of as a sinister part of the establishment."
In a world in which rising public opinion is considered by the New York
Times to be the second world power, science should be better advised — not
least when one peruses such 'academic' projects as Massachusetts Institute
of Technology's Institute for Soldier Nanotechnologies.
Daniel Amit
Racah Institute of Physics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel, and
Istituto di Fisica, Universita' di Roma, La Sapienza, Ple Aldo Moro 2,
00185 Rome, Italy
Comments