3 ms·
A more accurate title might have been "before NSF." The practical effect of the shift from patronage to grants is a transition from multipolar to unipolar scie
by kapitza 10y ago
A more accurate title might have been "before NSF."
The practical effect of the shift from patronage to grants is a transition from multipolar to unipolar science. Any one rich patron may or may not have an instinct for what research deserves support, but their collective judgment should be a fairly wise crowd. Few rich people were born yesterday.
In a grant-funded ecosystem, even multiple funding institutions which are branches of multiple governments tend to merge into one big meta-institution, with one big opinion. This is how we get intellectual monocultures across many fields, especially fields without practical feedback from a commercial application. One big opinion is hard to change. Unfortunately, science is kind of about changing our minds...
- dilemma 10y agoLee Smolin credits this monoculture with the lack of progress in the field of physics over the past decade, and the popularity of string theory, in The Trouble with Physics.
- untilHellbanned 10y agoMonoculture is reinforced by the Internet. The internet is a meme machine. In yesteryear, not knowing what other people are doing was the norm. Not knowing is good for independent thought.
- jessriedel 10y agoThere are plenty of billionaires rich enough to support scientists for their whole careers, and certainly much more than in the past. So to make your point, you have have to argue that some sort of cultural/status effect is keeping unconventional scientists from just taking billionaire money, or disincentivizing them from giving it away.
- lukasm 10y agoIsn't the existing system of grants disincentivizing billionaires from giving the money away? "My taxes goes to X institution" "I donated to Y institution"
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- internaut 10y agoI'd go with your second choice. We have not run out of clever people. Plenty of billionaires but not plenty of aristocrats. How many wealthy people are like the Koch brothers? Not that many. Most of them are concerned with status only.