Must Government Fund Science?
AEI's Tony Mills and British biochemist Terence Kealey debate whether science needs government funding.
M. Anthony (Tony) Mills of the American Enterprise Institute and Terence Kealey of The Cato Institute debate the resolution, "Government must play a role in fostering scientific and technological progress by funding basic research."
Defending the resolution is Mills, a senior fellow and director of the Center for Technology, Science, and Energy at the American Enterprise Institute. He is also a senior fellow at the Pepperdine School of Public Policy and a scholar associate of the Society of Catholic Scientists. Dr. Mills was previously a resident senior fellow at the R Street Institute and an editor for numerous publications. His writings have appeared in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New Atlantis, National Affairs, Issues in Science and Technology, and various peer-reviewed journals. He holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Notre Dame.
Taking the negative is Kealey, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. Originally trained in medicine and biochemistry, he is a former lecturer in clinical biochemistry at the University of Cambridge. Between 2001 and 2014 he was the vice-chancellor of the University of Buckingham. He is known for his 1996 book, The Economic Laws of Scientific Research.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The only thing government funds is “the science”.
Other way around. Only things the government funds are Science.
Both wrong: If we knew what was Science or not beforehand , it would mean that there is never debate on it.THe bad science that came out of Russia for example is what lead the great scientist Michael Polanyi to argue that your positions lead to horrors
“[S]cientists, freely making their own choice of problems and pursuing them in the light of their own personal judgment, are in fact co-operating as members of a closely knit organization.”
“Such self-co-ordination of independent initiatives leads to a joint result which is unpremeditated by any of those who bring it about.”
“Any attempt to organize the group … under a single authority would eliminate their independent initiatives, and thus reduce their joint effectiveness to that of the single person directing them from the centre. It would, in effect, paralyse their co-operation.”
We’re doomed- one’s approach to S&T is literally medieval- The New Atlantis is about as scientific as the Claremont Review, and the other is a refugee from a diploma mill.
No wonder the left is in charge of American science .
Nothing says “Science” like “Men can be girls if they really, really want it”
“Men can be girls just by saying so” is more like it.
For the record:
Men cannot be women.
Women cannot become men.
As if medieval were wrong at its time, what a moronic statement. The historicism of today’s totally stupid folks with massive opinions.
The New Atlantis represents science to you because almost certainly you do not have a science degree.I do. And NA has some good, some bad.That is life in general
As to Claremont Reivew, you clod,it is a ‘REVIEW” which is predicated on not being about whether you have a degree or not but whether you can follow a logical analysis, a review.
What a goddam moron you are.
Science research that leads to new and improved products or processes for creating products pays for itself over the course of years or decades, and should be funded by companies and venture capitalists.
Basic science research should be taking place at universities, many of which have enormous endowments and donor fundraising operations. Just put someone in charge of the university who is bright enough not to alienate the university’s biggest donors on behalf of students who are terrorist sympathizers.
“pays for itself’ would mean that government woujld not get involved.Basic Economics. You know why government didn’t give us Amazon !!!!!!! Ofcourse you don’t.
NOta shred of moral analysis in your posts.All warmed-over Utilitarianism posing as ‘thought’
Itwas folks like you that pushed for the syphillis testing on unsuspecting Blacks, because on balance it will pay for itself and have useful results.The infrastructurea and informatioin processing for the Holocaust came from IG Farben and IBM
No. Next question.
“must government fund science?” Pretty sure the current (Marxist propaganda = “the science”) entirely closes that case being absolutely not.
What does the definition of the USA say? “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, —— by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
There’s your answer. Gosh that was so hard. I spent hours and hours trying to find it ……… NOT. Why is the US Constitution always being “debated”? Seriously. That is the question that needs to be answered.
No.
If it must, then only if the government is forbidden from acting on it.
Well I think about the Food pyramid and the destructive effects of removing govt. funding from universities that had no stake or profit to be made by skewing the science for profit. As it turned out giving it over to the pharmaceuticals, hospital’s who ran with it… I’m sure they notice the massive expansion of the Pharmaceutical Medical Industrial complex that went down during the 80/90’s. But hey money is money. So giving everything to the Corporate world is the wrong Idea. Truth gets skewed that way all the time. Not that the Govt. doesn’t skew stuff… I.E. Covid origins etc..
You argue against yourself.
BOTH are in collusion with the sjuper-stupd-asshole 30 by 30 project of Biden’s
Nationwide, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that 5 million acres of land will end up covered with solar panels.
Oops, Reason troglodytes : BLM proposes to open 22 million acres in Western states to solar development
YOU MISSED BOTH NEWS RELEASES AND THAT IS AMAZING
Government funding of science is control of science. We get lysenkoism, Covid tyranny, Bill Gates’ murderous jabs, corrupted FDA, approval of GMOs and synthetic foods, poison additives.
One of the worst offenses is the suppression of LENR-low-energy nuclear reactions, that burst into the news in 1989 with the Fleischmann & Pons press conference
MIT scientist and science journalist Eugene Mallove quit MIT in a rage after the physics department head announced that they got zero results in attempts to repeat the experiments. That put the kabosh on funding.
Eugene Mallove sent an open letter to all the Congressmen and to the president, endorsed by Arthur C. Clarke, and founded the Infinite Energy Foundation to fund sientific research.
it has only recently gotten a little more attention. Biggest opponents are in academia’s science establishment, just like Galileo’s biggest opponents.
Mills loses again.
What makes college so expensive?The fact it has to meet government standards if it takes even one cent from the governemtn.
What makes students stupid? The fact that even stupid sub-par intellects like Biden want everybody to take that science course
What makes college so contrvoversial?That governemant demands you accept taking aborted baby parts instead of frogs for your Bio class.
Mills needs to get a real job , one where guys go out after work for a beer.
UPDATE:It is far worse than the first estimate.
“The BLM’s preferred alternative in the updated Western Solar Plan would provide approximately 22 million acres of land open for solar application”
MIlls makes little sense. Tell me, Mills, how to scientifically reconcile the 30 x 30 project with “The BLM’s preferred alternative in the updated Western Solar Plan would provide approximately 22 million acres of land open for solar application”
What is not hugely destructive of the environment about 22 million acres for SOLAR
Mills should know better, was he sleeping in the forest when Biden beamed with joy because he was going to give us the Disinformation Governance Board (DGB)
Really Mills, my neighborhood would hiss at you for being such clueless Pollyanna pansy 🙂