New Scientist, issue of June 29, 1996 p.23 has
an article by Cambridge biochemist Terence Kealey
"You've all got it wrong".
It begins:
'Governments should not fund science. Everybody
believes they should, but they are mistaken.'
Then he explains why, contrary to what appears
to be obvious, government funding for (basic)
science is a socially poor idea and (again,
contary to what appears obvious) does not really
work.
Issue of August 3, 1996 carries an article
by Keith Pavitt, Director of the Science Policy
Unit, in which he attempts to refute Kealey's
arguments. So are some anti-Kealey letters
published in several recent issues of the
New Scientist.
Of course, 'who's right' is a matter of opinion.
Everyone should decide for her/himself after
reading both articles.
In my personal view, the Kealey's arguments are
pretty strong and neither Pavitt, nor the published
(so far) letters have succeeded in provided anything
truly convincing to refute Kealey. The way the
science funding is now instrumented, through the
secretive, manipulative and idea-suppressing 'peer
review' dominated by the grantsmanship mafias and
old boys networks does much more harm than good.
Whatever (social) goods are occasionally produced
by it (science) happen largely IN SPITE OF the
existing funding system rather than because of it.
Thank you, Professor Kealey for the profound
insights.
**********************************
Alexander A. Berezin, PhD
Department of Engineering Physics
McMaster University, Hamilton,
Ontario, Canada, L8S 4L7
tel. (905) 525-9140 ext. 24546
e-mail: BEREZIN at MCMASTER.CA
**********************************
