Comments on: Long Live Mode 1 Science – Or Not http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3402 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: David Bruggeman http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3402&cpage=1#comment-912 David Bruggeman Sun, 13 Feb 2005 20:41:23 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3402#comment-912 Science and technology policy, certainly in the United States, has functioned in Mode 2 for the entire history of the Republic. It has usually been articulated from an application standpoint (we need to better understand this Louisiana we just bought, better navigational charts would cut down on shipping losses, etc.). The values aspect is the only part of this Leshner seems to address. Another interesting line of inquiry is why application-based Mode 2 concerns don't raise the hackles of the scientific community to the extent that values-based Mode 2 concerns. I suspect that the former better allows for scientists to function in a Mode 1 fashion and to be left to their own devices. Science and technology policy, certainly in the United States, has functioned in Mode 2 for the entire history of the Republic. It has usually been articulated from an application standpoint (we need to better understand this Louisiana we just bought, better navigational charts would cut down on shipping losses, etc.). The values aspect is the only part of this Leshner seems to address.

Another interesting line of inquiry is why application-based Mode 2 concerns don’t raise the hackles of the scientific community to the extent that values-based Mode 2 concerns. I suspect that the former better allows for scientists to function in a Mode 1 fashion and to be left to their own devices.

]]> By: Bob Frodeman http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3402&cpage=1#comment-911 Bob Frodeman Sat, 12 Feb 2005 17:34:59 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3402#comment-911 Leshner writes: "Protesting the imposition of value-related constraints on science has been the usual response, but it doesn’t work because it doesn’t resonate with the public." Rather, it doesn't work because the claim makes no sense. Values are not imposed on science, or anything else. Science begins in values, is shot through with values, and is used to serve values. (Which emphatically does not mean that science can be reduced to values.) Science is a procedure--a fine one at that--not an end in itself. Leshner writes: “Protesting the imposition of value-related constraints on science has been the usual response, but it doesn’t work because it doesn’t resonate with the public.” Rather, it doesn’t work because the claim makes no sense. Values are not imposed on science, or anything else. Science begins in values, is shot through with values, and is used to serve values. (Which emphatically does not mean that science can be reduced to values.) Science is a procedure–a fine one at that–not an end in itself.

]]> By: kevin vranes http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=3402&cpage=1#comment-910 kevin vranes Fri, 11 Feb 2005 22:52:39 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=3402#comment-910 Opportunities indeed. There’s perhaps an interesting line of inquiry here about the differences in change between crisis-driven change and slow evolution. Can we say that WWII was the crisis that pushed us into a Mode 1 Vannevar Bush world (from some sort of Mode 0 of a completely different description)? If so, did we then slowly move into Mode 2? Or can we say that with the pressure of intense cold war–driven competition alleviated, the removal of a “crisis” precipitated a shift from 1 to 2? If that’s the case, what nature of crisis would be enough to push us from 2 back to 1, or from 2 into a new 3? Opportunities indeed. There’s perhaps an interesting line of inquiry here about the differences in change between crisis-driven change and slow evolution. Can we say that WWII was the crisis that pushed us into a Mode 1 Vannevar Bush world (from some sort of Mode 0 of a completely different description)? If so, did we then slowly move into Mode 2? Or can we say that with the pressure of intense cold war–driven competition alleviated, the removal of a “crisis” precipitated a shift from 1 to 2? If that’s the case, what nature of crisis would be enough to push us from 2 back to 1, or from 2 into a new 3?

]]>