Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion
Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion
Related Guide Picks
Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion
Guide Rating - 
Scientific research consumes billions of taxpayer dollars each year. Ideally, this money would be allocated based upon which research projects are the most promising and beneficial. Ideally, allocation would be a matter of science, not politics. But is that how things actually are?
Summary
Title: Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion
Author: Daniel S. Greenberg
Publisher: University of Chicago Press
ISBN: 0226306348
Pros:
• Well written and easy to understand for both lay readers and scientists
• Shocking and disturbing information about ethics in modern science
Cons:
• More time could have been devoted to possible solutions
Description:
• Critical investigation into the state of science in America
• Exploration of how science has lost its ethical "purity"
• Argues that science must become more involved with politics
Book Review
Many seem to feel that scientific funding really would be a matter of scientific merit, but that isn’t entirely the case in the United States. Politics always plays a much bigger role than most realize, and perhaps more of a role than scientific merit itself. This shouldn’t be surprising — after all, the decision as to what projects will be most beneficial is itself a political question. In addition, when politicians are the ones who decide what to fund and what not to fund, the intrusion of political factors is inevitable.
A problem is created here because science itself in America tries to project an image of being nonpolitical, and most people have bought into this myth. Thus the political factors in funding science become obscured and even hidden entirely — and this is not appropriate. As Greenberg argues, the problem is not that politics plays a role in science, but rather that scientific leaders have misled us into believing that they don’t play a role.
One result is that most of the public becomes excluded from a political debate which concerns them all. They don’t have a voice in the discussion and won’t have a voice so long as everyone involved keeps denying that the discussion is even taking place. Greenberg is able to cite abundant examples where undeserving or questionable projects receive funding while more promising work goes begging because it lacks powerful patrons.
Another result is that science itself loses some of its integrity. This comes not simply from the politicians, but also (and perhaps more so) from the influence of industry. The “invisible hand of the market” is inadequate to the task of monitoring science — and matters are only getting worse as the impact of scientific research on society grows. Indeed, markets have become much of the problem:
Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion |
- At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), an undergraduate was unable to complete a homework assignment that was closely related to work he was doing for a company because he had signed a non-disclosure agreement that prohibited him from discussing his work. Interestingly, the company that employed the student was owned by an MIT faculty member, and the instructor of the class owned a competing firm. In the end, the instructor of the course was accused of using his homework as a form of corporate espionage, and the student was given another assignment.
The values which underlie the market are not the same as those which characterize science — thus, when the market intrudes upon science, the latter becomes corrupted. This is particularly true in academia, where the future of science is created and developed. Greenberg cites one egregious incident where market-driven values resulted in a horrendous ethical lapse.
Important product disclaimer information about this About site.
