Just finished a book called 'Litium 6' by Risti Isomäki. I found it well written, entertaining, and most of all, informative. If we ignore the anti-climax.. okay, it wasn't an anti-climax as such, it was very nice and clever, it just didn't last long enough to really count as a climax.. anyway, the "climax" aside, the first idea after finishing was that it should be obligatory reading to all that are expected to have an opinion on nuclear power. Okay, yeah, I know everyone can have an opinion and probably do have one but that doesn't mean it is *their* opinion. Is the opinion based on an actual decision which in turn is based on information for and against, or is it an "opinion" that is repeptition of everything all the authorities have said without the person actually knowing why they should think the way they think based on facts? My guess is that most people would fall under the second category, me included. Which is why reading 'Litium 6' is a very good way to begin the journey to an informative opinion on nuclear power.
I thought that this book should be included on a list of books that all elected members of the parliament should read before allowed to attend a single meeting. Then I remebered that even if there was such a list, the actual members wouldn't read them but their assistants who would then make a summary of it to them. And since most assistants are not linguists or literature students, they would do it badly. Even if the MPs would read the books, let us not forget that the majority of them are male, and males by definition are contaminated with a virus of not ever being able to admit that they don't know something or that they were wrong about something and would now want to re-evaluate that stance. So that would be the end of the enlightment era at the Parliament. Besides, they have showed to be very good at acting according to the law and asking for statements on an issue's experts and then ignoring those statements and instead do the bidding of the infamous EK.
But if you think you can handle your taken-for-granted values and stances being challenged, I suggest you take some time to read this with thought and, if school's physics lessons were a long time ago, with a copy of 'Physics for Dummies'.
2 kommenttia
stellagrrrl
25.5.2009 21:07
thanks for the tip. i actually claim to be one of those people who do not have an opinion on nuclear power. i have heard the opinions of many political parties and, additionally, hear several facts/"facts" about the dangers and benefits of nuclear power. i just do not have enough information to have an opinion on the matter -- or to be more exact, to have an opinion i would feel comfortable defending on the matter. i would like to know more.
Splenetic
25.5.2009 22:57
You welcome. You may be right, perhaps NATO membership and gay marriages are more of those either-or issues since they don't require much actual knowledge. I have an acquintance at the city council and she complains that the people who are supposed to present them objectively the background of an issue to be decided upon, but they all tend to be on the payroll of some company and give actual information on things that are beneficial to the company but conceal the facts that would be bad for the company. I guess the political information flow is similar in every way. Lying principle no. 1: stick as close to the truth as you can get away with. Giving half of the truth seems to work best.
In case you get interested in the subject I'd like to recommend the following titles I dug up from the library today. Haven't read them yet but they seem to make a good case. I tried to find those that have some authority to comment the thing and also to find books from both sides of the disbute (this seems to be the only way to get the whole picture since both sides hide something). :
Hyvä tietää ydinvoimasta & Hyvä tietää ydinjätteestä (2007, Energiateollisuus -> probably pro-nuce)
Ulla Klötzer: Säteilevä tulevaisuus, parts 1 ("Atomit rauhan käytössä") & 2 ("Atomit sodassa")
Olli Tammilehto: Ekofilosofia, ympäristöliike ja ydinvoima (50.1 TAM; Ympäristökeskuksen julkaisuja -> probably anti-nuce)
Björn Wahlström: Ydin ja omenankuori (factual essays on nuclear power) & Villakoiran ydin
Ydinvoima, valta ja vastarinta (published by Like so it's probably pretty objective)
Ydinvoima ja innovaatiot (2008, Energiakeskus -> probably pro-nuce)
Tsernobyl: maailman pahin onnettomuus (1986 so it's probably not the most objective and informative presentation of the event but I suppose it works as a just fine trip down the memory lane)