bellisarius
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2017
- Posts
- 16,761
Throughout recorded history, and some not recorded, science has been inextricably inter-woven with government and religion. The ancient priests and rulers used science to keep the population in line and extort monies from them. The priests of Egypt used their knowledge of events such as solar eclipses to frighten the people and extort gold from them to "save the kingdom." All across the globe we have ancient sites with precise astronomical alignments and all associated with religion and government.
Initially it was the priests that were the scientists of their time. Later it became independent researchers who had highly placed individuals as their patrons. At times those researchers ran afoul of the prevailing religion of the times, Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin are good examples. But the scientist could approach various potential patrons to receive the funding they needed to further their research. Competing theories abounded.
Since WWII the primary source of funding is the various governments. More and more monies were made available for various fields of research. Not surprisingly there has been a surge in scientific knowledge the likes of which the world has never seen before. A great deal of amazing things have come about as a result of this.
However there is a down side to this. Government employed researchers become stuck in a single line of investigation. Scientist like Fauci (and I use his name only because most everyone reading this will recognize it, there are quite literally hundreds of Fauci's out there) wield an enormous amount of power. Power that very few lay people think about. They, along with their colleagues, sit on the review committees that determine which researchers outside the government will receive grant funding. Not surprisingly the grant monies predominantly go to those lines of research that support their own. Competing or contradictory lines are left to languish. They also, as anyone can observe, receive an inordinate amount of attention from the media. In effect, they have replaced the priests of old.
This focus of single line focus of funding leads to stagnation. A good example of this is NASA. Bezos and Musk are excellent examples of NASA's failures. Those two have managed to accomplish in a few short years what NASA hasn't been able to do for thirty years. It took an obscene amount of investment on their part to get to where they are today. They are living proof that individual patrons with means can achieve where politically driven research cannot. They are also living proof that real innovation comes from the outliers, not necessarily 'main stream' science.
My point here is very simple. Forget the media and researchers entrenched in 'me too' lines of investigation. The real answers are coming from outside that box. True enough, some of those 'outside the box' lines of investigation are dead ends but you don't have to buy into 'worshiping' them either. Skepticism is a healthy trait.
Initially it was the priests that were the scientists of their time. Later it became independent researchers who had highly placed individuals as their patrons. At times those researchers ran afoul of the prevailing religion of the times, Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin are good examples. But the scientist could approach various potential patrons to receive the funding they needed to further their research. Competing theories abounded.
Since WWII the primary source of funding is the various governments. More and more monies were made available for various fields of research. Not surprisingly there has been a surge in scientific knowledge the likes of which the world has never seen before. A great deal of amazing things have come about as a result of this.
However there is a down side to this. Government employed researchers become stuck in a single line of investigation. Scientist like Fauci (and I use his name only because most everyone reading this will recognize it, there are quite literally hundreds of Fauci's out there) wield an enormous amount of power. Power that very few lay people think about. They, along with their colleagues, sit on the review committees that determine which researchers outside the government will receive grant funding. Not surprisingly the grant monies predominantly go to those lines of research that support their own. Competing or contradictory lines are left to languish. They also, as anyone can observe, receive an inordinate amount of attention from the media. In effect, they have replaced the priests of old.
This focus of single line focus of funding leads to stagnation. A good example of this is NASA. Bezos and Musk are excellent examples of NASA's failures. Those two have managed to accomplish in a few short years what NASA hasn't been able to do for thirty years. It took an obscene amount of investment on their part to get to where they are today. They are living proof that individual patrons with means can achieve where politically driven research cannot. They are also living proof that real innovation comes from the outliers, not necessarily 'main stream' science.
My point here is very simple. Forget the media and researchers entrenched in 'me too' lines of investigation. The real answers are coming from outside that box. True enough, some of those 'outside the box' lines of investigation are dead ends but you don't have to buy into 'worshiping' them either. Skepticism is a healthy trait.
