The U.S. science and engineering enterprise’s rigid defense of the Vannevar Bush model and its full-throated embrace of ideological DEI has left it politically exposed.
Interesting post! I agree with you that the scientific community is in need of reform. It is a mistake to blame everything on Trump, public distrust in science was a long time coming. I hope we can use this moment to build a better scientific enterprise in the US.
I am curious, what do you think of the the Vision for American Science and Technology put out by the AAAS? https://www.vastfuture.org/ I feel like their vision hits on a lot of the issues you have mentioned in this article.
However, I do think that scientists should be more engaged in policy, not less. By this, I don't mean academics should unleash more anti-Trump social media posts, but that scientists should be more engaged with policy makers and the general public, especially at the local level. I believe public perception of science would be improved if scientists spent more time using their skills to solve local issues. For example, Science For Georgia helps community members concerned about pollution in their area connect with scientists able to monitor and test pollution levels which gives the community data to advocate for better environmental policies in their area. I think actions like this will benefit people in the US and demonstrate that science isn't just another symptom of big government but a knowledge-building tool that can help solve tangible issues in the community.
THanks for the comment. The VAST work seems good, but it doesnt appear to really answer the question of how much money should go to PI-based research vs more strategic issues where the focus is also on translation. Always good for scientists to be more engaged, but I don't think that is the core issue. A core issue is sci funding is too geographically concentrated so less support for it in many areas. And it doesn't lead to as much commercilization as it could
Interesting post! I agree with you that the scientific community is in need of reform. It is a mistake to blame everything on Trump, public distrust in science was a long time coming. I hope we can use this moment to build a better scientific enterprise in the US.
I am curious, what do you think of the the Vision for American Science and Technology put out by the AAAS? https://www.vastfuture.org/ I feel like their vision hits on a lot of the issues you have mentioned in this article.
However, I do think that scientists should be more engaged in policy, not less. By this, I don't mean academics should unleash more anti-Trump social media posts, but that scientists should be more engaged with policy makers and the general public, especially at the local level. I believe public perception of science would be improved if scientists spent more time using their skills to solve local issues. For example, Science For Georgia helps community members concerned about pollution in their area connect with scientists able to monitor and test pollution levels which gives the community data to advocate for better environmental policies in their area. I think actions like this will benefit people in the US and demonstrate that science isn't just another symptom of big government but a knowledge-building tool that can help solve tangible issues in the community.
THanks for the comment. The VAST work seems good, but it doesnt appear to really answer the question of how much money should go to PI-based research vs more strategic issues where the focus is also on translation. Always good for scientists to be more engaged, but I don't think that is the core issue. A core issue is sci funding is too geographically concentrated so less support for it in many areas. And it doesn't lead to as much commercilization as it could