Scientist Versus Politician.

The first topic discussed was "Is the Scientist Involved in Responsibility regarding the uses to which his work is put?" It soon became evident that direct argument on this question led to the problem of whether the scientist or the politician best knew how scientific discoveries were to be employed. Mr Pearce observed that the question was 'analagous to that of censorship," and various schemes (mostly impracticable) for parliamentary reform were advocated. Though no direct conclusion was reached, it was generally agreed that, as Professor Campbell put it, "The problem is essentially one of our relations as human beings. The study of this has been lamentably neglected."

"Can it be expected that scientific method may be extended to embrace all fields of experience?" was the next question under fire, and probably the thing of greatest value gained here was Potter's definition (quoted by Dr Williams): "A scientific statement is one that can be falsified." It was suggested that human studies might be developed as fields of scientific study (characteristically, members refused to acknowledge Psychology as a Science), but in spite of Mr Malcolm's efforts, no-one was really game to discuss possibilities as far as religious experience was concerned.