President Obama gave a speech today regarding science research, funding, and education. This speech gives a very broad plan for the future of our country’s scientific research and development. When compared with the American Competitiveness Initiative (that I spoke about in the group presentation), this plan does focus more on the education and research aspect instead of the profit-driven science and technological advancements. Yet, there are many similarities between them as well, which focuses on intertwining education, science, and the economy. While all of the points in this speech sound like they can help the country advance in many areas of science, there continues to be a strong tie between science and the need for economic growth (the "profit" of the government). There are many, MANY issues addressed in the speech, so if you have some time, check it out!
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/04/27/obamas-strident-support-of-science/
(The transcript of the speech is a few paragraphs down on the page)
Showing posts with label Science Funding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Science Funding. Show all posts
Monday, April 27
Wednesday, April 1
Science Funding: Justice or Utility?
I’ve been thinking over the discussion in class yesterday and am realizing that some of the confusion over science funding may arise because of the conflation of two related issues. On the one hand, we tend to believe that the scientist should be free to investigate those things which he or she has a genuine interest in without being manipulated or censured by the government or society. This is assuming his or her research is ethical in nature and doesn’t compromise the society’s values. On the other side of the equation, is the individual tax-paying citizen, who in some degree supports science funding through their tax dollars. Again, it seems logical that like the scientist, each of these people should have the freedom to choose what things are worthy of their investment. Should they too have the right to study, vicariously through the use of their money, those things which they genuinely want to support? We would like for both the scientist and the citizen to have complete freedom of action but what happens when these freedoms oppose each other in society? That seems like the foundational question that we are asking?
As strange as it sounds at first, I kind of like Matthew’s idea of having a list of issues which citizen’s can allocate their individual taxes toward. If it is the public’s money, the public should have a large degree of say on how that money is spent. Will this crimp the speed and efficiency of scientific advancement? Yes. This system wouldn’t be as powerful or as versatile as a more “elitist” organization where the resource allocation decisions are made at higher levels. But, this is the price you pay for justice it seems. Democracies were never meant to be efficient. Does this debate boil down to a question of justice versus utility? And if it does, what is our underlying criterion for deciding how to allocate funding?
As strange as it sounds at first, I kind of like Matthew’s idea of having a list of issues which citizen’s can allocate their individual taxes toward. If it is the public’s money, the public should have a large degree of say on how that money is spent. Will this crimp the speed and efficiency of scientific advancement? Yes. This system wouldn’t be as powerful or as versatile as a more “elitist” organization where the resource allocation decisions are made at higher levels. But, this is the price you pay for justice it seems. Democracies were never meant to be efficient. Does this debate boil down to a question of justice versus utility? And if it does, what is our underlying criterion for deciding how to allocate funding?
Friday, February 13
Science Funding Difficulties
Things are looking pretty dark these days for many researchers: A sobering news feature from Nature.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)