|Dear Ms. Nakanishi:
Excuse me to write in English because as an old English typist, I always use English when I write on a word processor. I always use hand writing when I write in Japanese because I hate Kana Kanji conversion.
The talk with you was rarely exciting and reveling one.
Thank you for your comment on your home page. Before your notice, I could enjoy
it finding it on Google. I have recently opened my own home page and uploaded
the whole text of the discussion. So I propose you to make a link to mine. http://www.jimnishimura.jp I will upload this email to my home page. Please feel it free to upload it to yours.
The discussion was thrilling because of the decisive split of opinions
on some points shown below.
1) How to help people to make their own decision on their Environment-Cost
problems Your attitude is provide them calculable index of
the environmental risk which can be directly compared with the monetary
cost. You now calculate the degree of the environmental risk by the
medical expenditure due to arise from the risk. In the end you must
estimate the loss of human life in the monetary unit.
2) Ｍｙ ａｔｔｉｔｕｄｅ ｃｏｍｐｌｅｔｌｙ ａｇｒｅｅｓ ｗｉｔｈ ｙｏｕ ｕｎｔｉｌ ｗｅ ｔｒｙ ｔｏ ｆｉｎｄ ｏｒ ｕｎｖｅｉｌ the
risks involved in the proposed action. The difference lies in its indexing.
I oppose to any trial of arraying two qualitatively different matters on
a single scale. Balancing of the qualitatively different matters or Wise
Decision is the most important task one is responsible while he is
living. The indexing will deprive him of wise decision.
3) On risk problem, my effort as a scientist is concentrated on finding and unveiling the hidden risk itself and communicating it accurately to the concerned people, while your present effort is concentrated not on finding but on indexing of the already found results. The difference of our attitude arises from each conviction on how to deal with the social matter as an engineer. Of curse both are equally concerned with the effect of their work. However, the ways were different. In order to have an impact, you have put more emphasis on the mass of the public support while I on the power the fact or the truth I discovered.
( 二人の違い。人々の強い支持か、Ｆａｃｔ 自体の強い力か）
4) Our difference is ultimately originated from the attitudes toward politics,
which is equal to the distance from the society or the mass of people.
You are enough considerate in expressing yourself before the people as
you confessed in our talk. I am contrary. Always I am too honest
to gain the unanimous support from the pubic. I always address to the intellectual
minority. In other words I am not a politician at all. I am an educator
or philosopher, I think. In risk assessment, I am much more concerned
with reminding the people of the importance of the principles and the wisdom
dealing with the matter.
(違いは 政治との距離のとり方。 直接的効果をもとめるのか、考える人への原理と材料の提供か）
17年3月18日 西村 肇