Quote: "My immediate thought is that financial professionals could audit the value of past "pure science" and measure ROI" Wait -- the return on investment of

Quote: "My immediate thought is that financial professionals could audit the value of past "pure science" and measure ROI" Wait -- the return on investment of "pure science"? That's a contradiction in terms. Pure science shouldn't be evaluated that way -- only applied science has anything resembling a return on investment. I suspect the correspondent doesn't understand what pure science means. Obviously I could quote examples in which pure science has shaped the modern world -- quantum and relativity theories, evolution, cosmology -- but that misses the point that pure science shouldn't have to show a return to justify itself.