I came across a very interesting interview between Hank Pellissier (HP), the IEET’s (Institute of Ethics and Emerging Technologies) Managing Director, and Murray Robertson (MR), an artist who specializes in creating science images. From the Jan. 16, 2012 interview,

HP: If you could invent anything scientific, what would it be?

MR: Undoubtedly, a system that could provide accurate long range weather forecasts.

HP: What artists, and scientists, do you admire?

MR: John White (who accompanied Francis Drake on his 1565 expedition to North America) and Robert Fludd (“one of the last of the true Renaissance men”) are two artists for whom I have the greatest respect.

I am consistently amazed by the innovative work of many of the early pioneers in science including John Dalton, Joseph Black, Dimitri Mendeleev, Charles Darwin, Neils Bohr and Paul Dirac.

HP: If you could have nanobots in your body, what would they do?

MR: I would wish them to be dedicated to monitoring and maintaining my general health and well being.

Here’s one of Robertson’s images (downloaded from Nanotechnology Now’s webpage for Murray Robertson),

Inspired by the original foglet designs of Dr. J. Storrs Hall (see "Utility Fog") Nanotechnology is a generic image created (by Murrary Robertson) for the Royal Society of Chemistry, UK, "chemsoc timeline."

The interview is prefaced with this comment,

The population of techno-progressive artists is tiny, but perhaps accelerating. …

Here’s a little more about the IEET and its approach to technology and society (from their About page),

The IEET’s mission is to be a center for voices arguing for a responsible, constructive, ethical approach to the most powerful emerging technologies. We believe that technological progress can be a catalyst for positive human development so long as we ensure that technologies are safe and equitably distributed. We call this a “technoprogressive” orientation.

It’s nice to have a momentary respite from all the ‘doom and gloom’ scenarios, the ‘let’s hype it up so we can make money’ approach, etc.but I’m not sure about a group that calls itself ‘technoprogressive’ since that suggests (to me) a bias towards technology. Still, that is very attractive science image.