The Myth of Science as a Public Good (by Terence Kealey)
30 Jul, 2009 | Posted by | under Domains
Vice Chancellor of the University of Buckingham (Britain’s only independent university), Terence Kealey is a vocal critic of government funding of science. His first book, ‘The Economic Laws of Scientific Research,’ argues that state funding of science is neither necessary nor beneficial, a thesis that he developed in his recently published analysis of the causes scientific progress, ‘Sex, Science and Profits.’ In it, he makes the stronger claim that not only is government funding not …
First time here? Subscribe to Learn Free Internet Marketing for Updates.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.learnfreeinternetmarketing.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/twitter_url.gif)
Tweet This Post!
Related Posts
- Computer Science Colloquium 10/26/2008
- AGU Scientists Tech Talks - Using Google SketchUp with Google Earth for Scientific Applications
- Stephen Pierce - Internet Marketing Superconference 6
- The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same: Online Audiences and the Paradox of Web Traffic
- Oakland County’s Phil Bertolini Discusses the Impact of Web 2.0 on Government Communication
podrag | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Scientific reality? Sorry, I’m a professional engineer and there’s no scientific evidence for that. Do you have another example?
CO2 in a box with no other determining factors, then yes up to the point of saturation. That’s it though I’m afraid.
wildboy789789 | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
so anarchy would be the most productive?
Nielsio | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
You can’t help people through power. You can only forego people’s self-determination through power.
“Progress cannot be organized”
-Ludwig von Mises
wildboy789789 | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
true, but some good people seek power to help others
they just arnt as determined as the angry ones
Nielsio | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Political parties generally promise things that people like to hear, but people who seek power are ultimately not interested in peaceful cooperation. So my advice would be to not be fooled.
wildboy789789 | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
if a fascit party supported science and anti-violence i would change my way of life to be a fascist
thats how important those 2 veiws are to me
im a capitalist by the way
lexave | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
(continuing)
Just one other point: his comparison of Science with practicing Law is completely disingenuous. The Law itself is of course in the public, while practicing law is a profession because of the skills demanded. Whether or not it is a desirable state of affairs, the latter does not negate the former.
lexave | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
His general points are well taken, and his pointing out of the OECD findings are rather thought provoking. However, his ridicule of Einstein’s findings as public good is embarrassing. 1. His papers (e.g. of 1905) are clearly written, and most freshmen physicists would be able to understand the reasoning therein. 2. At least two of his three discoveries that year could never have been done under industrial R&D, ironically. 3. One doesn’t have to understand his papers to get the consequences.
pablojovany | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
i think he’s got a point with the science as a public good but that’s because we live in monetary system but what if we didn’t have a monetary system?
Kreadus005 | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Don’t get me wrong, I liked his tentative stance on the uncertainty of the temperature data, but I think thats a bit of an apples to oranges comparison.
One is a scientific reality; that if you pump enough CO2 into the atmosphere, things get hot. The other was some kind of human political elitism.
I liked the main topic about science as a hard-to-reproduce good, making its behavior more akin to a private good. And I liked the follow up concerning investor’s rights, pharmacuticals, and the like
Nielsio | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Not me.
Kreadus005 | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
He lost me at comparing global warming to eugenics.
Nielsio | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Yeah, I’m planning on making a video response to this and address some issues: the ’sovereign’ thing, the property rights issue, the Ford case and the pharmaceutical industry.
lukeev | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Fantastic stuff, just finished this after a second watch. Although the last 5 mins are pretty excruciating which is a shame, as he wriggles around a vague minarchist position and makes some absurd arguments around property rights after some excellent student questions. Again, thanks for the upload.
lukeev | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Great video - thanks for upping.
17Spartacus76 | July 30th, 2009 at 4:49 am #
Thanks for tying this all into one video. I hate having to make playlists.