Anjar Priandoyo

Catatan Setiap Hari

Politicization and Limitation of Science: The Case of Indonesia

leave a comment »

I found that the case of Siadoarjo Mud Flow 2006 is the most interesting cases, since its pro-cons is written in earth/geology/engineering scientic journal, where even a scientific opinion has differences. Natural science has a rigid study unlike social science, but that Sidoarjo case still have different opinion.

Meanwhile, in the more social/economic interpretation such as Bank Century Systemic Risk and the case of Frequency Allocation IM2 although not as complicated as Sidoarjo, the different interpretation on this case is very interesting to explored.

Well, in my opinion, it is indicating that science has so many limitation where the practical world is totally different and science sometimes (often) could not provide an answer. So its a reminder to any everyone to be very careful and prepare for the worst condition.

  1. Danny Hilman Natawidjaja, Gunung Padang 2013
  2. Warsito Taruno, Electrical Cancer Therapy 2013
  3. Edi Sutriono, Drilling Manager EMP, Sidoarjo Mud Flow 2006
  4. Kukuh Kertasafari, Facility Engineer, Chevron Bioremediation Corruption Case, 2012, 3 year verdict
  5. Arga Tirta Kirana, 2011 Bank Century, Pledoi, Putusan MA, 3 year verdict
  6. Indar Atmanto, Indosat M2 CEO, Indosat M2 2.1 Ghz Frequency Allocation, 2012-2013, 8 year verdict
Iklan

Written by Anjar Priandoyo

Desember 16, 2015 pada 9:30 pm

Ditulis dalam Science

Tinggalkan Balasan

Isikan data di bawah atau klik salah satu ikon untuk log in:

Logo WordPress.com

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Logout / Ubah )

Gambar Twitter

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Facebook

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout / Ubah )

Foto Google+

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout / Ubah )

Connecting to %s

%d blogger menyukai ini: