“The Politics of Pure Science” Revisited (original) (raw)

Abstract

On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Daniel Greenberg’s The Politics of Pure Science, we discuss trajectories of 20th century science policy concepts. Statistical analyses of digitized text corpora shed light on how ‘basic research’ became the predominant concept during World War II and in the postwar decades. In contrast to the 19th century ideal of pure science, ‘basic research’ conveys both the promise of utility and the promise of autonomy. The historical concept succeeded to bridge the gap between political and industrial expectations on the one hand and the uncertainty of the research endeavor on the other hand. Despite the more recent criticism toward the ideal of basic research, our analysis indicates that the very same concept remains relevant in normal science communication.

Key takeaways

sparkles

AI

  1. The concept of 'basic research' emerged as pivotal during WWII and postwar science policy.
  2. Statistical analysis indicates 'basic research' has gained usage over the last 25 years despite criticisms.
  3. Historical shifts reflect changing societal expectations and pressures on scientific research funding.
  4. The distinction between basic and applied research remains crucial for understanding modern science policy debates.
  5. Daniel Greenberg's work continues to resonate with ongoing discussions on the role of basic research in policy.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (19)

  1. Bush, V. (1945) Science: The Endless Frontier. A Report to the President. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
  2. Clarke, S. (2010) 'Pure Science with a Practical Aim: The Meanings of Fundamental Research in Britain, Circa 1916-1950', Isis, 101: 285-311.
  3. Daniels, G. H. (1967) 'The Pure-Science Ideal and Democratic Culture', Science, 156: 1699-705.
  4. European Commission. (2005) Frontier Research: The European challenge. High-level expert group report. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
  5. Freeman, E. M. (1929) 'The Agricultural Experiment Station: An Institute for Fundamental Research in Rural Affairs', Science, 69: 341-6.
  6. Godin, B. (2003) 'Measuring Science: Is there "Basic Research" without Statistics?', Social Science Information, 42/1: 57-90.
  7. and Schauz, D. (2016) 'The Changing Identity of Research: A Cultural and Conceptual History', History of Science, 54: 276-306.
  8. Greenberg, D. S. (1967) The Politics of Pure Science. New York: New American Library. (1969) The Politics of American Science. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
  9. Herzig, R. M. (2005) Suffering for Science. Reason and Sacrifice in Modern America. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
  10. Johnson, A. (2004) 'The End of Pure Science. Science Policy from Bayh-Dole to the NNI'. In: Davis B. et al. (eds) Discovering the Nanoscale, pp. 217-230. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  11. Kaldewey, D. and Schauz, D., eds. (forthcoming) Basic and Applied Research: The Language of Science Policy in the Twentieth Century. New York: Berghahn Books.
  12. Kline, R. (1995) 'Construing "Technology" as "Applied Science". Public Rhetoric of Scientists and Engineers in the United States, 1880-1945', Isis, 86: 194-221.
  13. Krige, J. (2006) American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  14. National Research Council. (1923) Reprint and Circular Series of the National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Research Council. National Resources Committee. (1941) Science Committee, Research-A National Resource: Industrial Research. Washington, DC: U.S. Gov. Print. Office.
  15. Pielke, R. A., Jr. (2012) '"Basic Research" as a Political Symbol', Minerva, 50: 339-61.
  16. Reagan, M. D. (1967) 'Basic and Applied Research: A Meaningful Distinction?', Science, 155: 1383-6.
  17. Rowland, H. (1883) 'A Plea for Pure Science', Science, 2: 242-50.
  18. Schauz, D. (2014) 'What is Basic Research? Insights from Historical Semantics', Minerva, 52: 273-328.
  19. Sherwin, C. W., and Isenson, R. S. (1967) 'Project Hindsight. A Defense Department Study of the Utility of Research', Science, 156/3782: 1571-7.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What explains the decline of 'pure science' prominence in the 20th century?add

The analysis reveals that 'pure science' saw a decline due to the emergence of 'fundamental research', which became prominent during and after WWI, capturing the practical benefits sought during that era.

How has the concept of 'basic research' evolved since the 1990s?add

Despite claims of its obsolescence, data from Web of Science shows 'basic research' frequency has been increasing over the past 25 years, underscoring its enduring relevance in science policy.

What impact did Vannevar Bush's definition of basic research have on science policy?add

Bush's definition positioned basic research as foundational for practical applications, influencing post-war US science policy and framing the tension between autonomy and directed research.

When did critiques of the basic research concept gain traction among scientists?add

Critiques emerged in the mid-1960s, with scientists questioning the dichotomy between basic and applied research alongside political scrutiny of government funding for non-applied studies.

How do modern science policy discourses reflect the basic research debate?add

Contemporary policies, like the European Research Council's 'frontier research', indicate a revival of basic research concepts, confronting the balance between directed research and scientific autonomy.