As the three-day gathering entered its official closing session, dialogue lab moderators, young scientists and students alike, bravely accepted the difficult task of reporting back to the audience before the participants took leave of each other. Each speaker sought simple and genuine words to convey the complex mixture of frustration and hope, that the experience had elicited in him or her. At the same time, each showed awareness of his responsibility to convey as objectively as possible, the opinions and ideas of the group that he or she represented. If the reports were in many ways highly critical, they were perceived (by many) from the floor of the conference hall, to be delivered with a sense of shared community and personal involvement. Only time will tell whether durable bonds have indeed been formed or strengthened, both on a purely intellectual basis and more.

André Hurst: you said it would be a shame if humans disappear, but the sun will die in a billion years. How long can we live?
Huber Reeves: one billion years. I am an optimist.

Speakers acknowledged the accomplishments of the second World Knowledge Dialogue (WKD), delineated imperatives for future meetings and described what they saw as participants' responsibilities beyond the walls of the conference centre. In a world that is rapidly changing, both disciplinary boundaries and people's attitudes to change itself, need to become more flexible and adapt quickly in order to survive.

In a rapidly globalizing society, dialogue is an important tool to weave together various ideals and knowledge in order to bring out the essence of our humanity. Perhaps what brings us to the level of effectively utilizing this dialogue is the answer to the key question 'What makes a real dialogue?'

Nobel Prize winner, Sir John Sulston, convincingly advanced the case for generating freely accessible knowledge for its own sake and for the sake of future innovation. Using the paradigm of biomedical research as an example, he used vector diagrams to highlight what he (and many others) now perceive as a dangerous and ultimately unsustainable imbalance in the relationship between the interests of commercial, profit-driven industry, scientific discovery and medicine as a social enterprise. The privatisation of translational medical research has sacrificed an essential ingredient of Science itself: the open-ended nature of discovery and the free dissemination of knowledge. Collaboration among scientists, non-governmental organizations and private citizens is required to reform this system for the public good and perhaps even for the very survival of humanity.

The 2008 Symposium will start with an interactive session on the conditions necessary for a fruitful dialogue. Audience participation will be central during the next two days, with plenary sessions taking place in the mornings and discussion workshops in the afternoons. Two main interdisciplinary topics chosen by our international Scientific Board, provide the themes that will guide our debate.