What is Big Science?

<b>[shando] "I get the impression that it is the 'scientific politicians' (ie: the members of the various granting bodies within the governmental bureaucracies) who make the decisions after due 'peer review'."</b>

This is more or less the way I see it.

<b>[shando] " ... these 'scientific politicians' are heavily invested in the current paradigm, and the outliers are effectively shut off from support by public funding."</b>

And this gets us back to my observation that political factors frequently crowd out scientific factors when the deciders are politicians. Scientific politicians are ... politicians.

It's not that they can-not make decisions that are good for the advancement of science. It's just that they do-not.

This is similar to the observation that governments never do anything that creates wealth. It's not that they can-not, it's just that they do-not.

I believe there are a few exceptions that one might point to. Their rarity only supports my point. Wasting resources is not their goal. Neither is conserving resources. To politicians all resources are endless. All they have to do is raise the tax rate or raise the spending limit, which makes all problems go away, and they can return to the one thing they really enjoy. Controlling someone else's behavior.

I've always been puzzled by this desire to control. Perhaps the following is part of the explanation.

<ul>There is a sub-genre within the porno industry known as BDSM (bondage, discipline, sadism, masochism). It is primarily a male thing, but to my surprise about a fourth of the people active here are women. These active participants divide themselves into two basic groups - Doms and Subs (dominants and submissives). These various labels are more or less self explanatory, and I will not go into any more detail. Look it up if you want to. The internet is great, isn't it? [*]

<ul>Did you hear the one about the masochist and the sadist?. The masochist says to the sadist "Beat me." And the sadist says "No."</ul>
But <u>most</u> porn is much more ... normal? Just your run of the mill boy-girl sex. No whips or hand cuffs, no slaves and masters, etc. The only thing about it that is controversial is the explicitness. And that explicitness makes a lot of us very uncomfortable.

===

My point? Out here in the physical world people have these same ... proclivities.

Most of us are normal. We don't want to be a slave, and we don't want to be a slave master. We just want to live our lives and be left alone. Our main goal is to build a bright shiny future for ourselves, and for those we love. It is a happy accident that, in the process of doing this for oursleves we also enrich the lives of innocent bystanders. They do not coompensate us for this gift. At least not explicitly. But if they are also among the normal they will also do things for themselves that accidently benefit others. And so on. Eventually the circle closes, and someone does something that accidently benefits the first guy.

But a few of us DO want to be slave masters. Not sexually, but politically. These people become politicans. Or go to work for a politician.

And a surprising number of us DO want to be slaves. Not sexually, but politically. These people go on the dole, in one way or another. A few people on the dole are there for reasons beyond their control. But these few individuals manage to find a way to get back on their feet, and are soon off the dole. Many never try. They are content to do as their masters demand, in excange for a "guaranteed" subsistence.

Some (many?) corporations also "go on the dole", and become slaves. We know them as cronies. They get special favors (fat contracts, regulatory relief, etc) in exchange for supporting their master during an election.</ul>
But my real point is, all of this is the foundation on which Big Science is built.

<b>[shando] " ...this is a systemic flaw ... "</b>

Yes.


[*] I guess this discussion would not be complete without mentioning that a few people have taken this master/slave thing outside of the world of fantasy. Slavery (real, actual bought and sold people) is still alive and well in the 21st century. Politicians and their cronies are at the front of this disgusting side of humanity.

<b>[stoat from 14 Dec 2010-14:09:52] "I would like to see Big Science embrace it's rights and duties as the 'Fifth Estate'."</b>

From time to time I go back and re-read a thread from start to finish. Sometimes I find something that I either missed the first time, or that I now find interesting where I did not find it intersting before. For example, the quote above from nearly a year ago.

Stoat - would you be willing to go into a little detail about what you mean by 'rights' and 'duties' in the context of your comment?

As a side bar, do you have any quibbles about my proposed definition of Big Science? Because if you do, we should probably first try to minimize such differences.

At the very least we should be aware that a difference of opinion exists.

Regards,
LB

The deck is stacked for of the current belief system based on the BB model and an expanding universe. This is the same process used in the 10th century only now they call it science. Nothing ever changes other than the names used by either the "ins" or the "outs". These days the "ins" are called scientists and the "outs" are called crazies. No doubt at some point in the future the "ins" of today will be seen to be something other than scientists just like the "ins" of the 10th century fell out of grace as human advancement gets to some new level. Maybe the Gov of Texas has the right idea.

<b>[Jim] "The deck is stacked for of the current belief system ... "</b>

Yes, Jim, it is. That's the point of this thread.

Big Science is the offspring of Big Government, which puts politicians in control of a lot of mankind's total spending. And politicians make ALL of their decisions for political reasons, rather than for good reasons.

<b>[Jim] "Maybe the Gov of Texas has the right idea."</b>

Maybe. Probably not. He is a politician, so his thinking will always be political, rather than scientific or economic. (Yeah, yeah, I know there are some exceptions. Big whup.) Right now a lot of the people are paying more attention to the politicians than they usually do, so some politicians (perhaps including Mr. Perry?) are adjusting their thinking a little.

Unless the people suddenly develop a longer attention span than what they historically have had, this new mood is probably not going to last. But I'm cautiously optimistic.

===

As long as we allow politicians to be in control of big portions of human activity, we will have to put up with the deck being stacked in favor of a few limited options. And that necessarily means stacked against all other options.

Only free people are able to create a vast array of options. We had that for a while. Now we don't.

LB

Well my point is that the world was always this way. An established faith is made a focus of the culture's energy and right now that faith is based on the BB model. In the past and in different cultures the same process is in play with faith in some other model, so why should things be different now? The current faithful are rewarded and the doubters are crazies. At least now crazies are fed to the lions or a worse fate. We are free to rant on sort of--

You are right, Jim. The world (meaning mankind) has always been this way.

Sigh.

But as I look back at our history I see a few (very few), brief (very brief) exceptions. Isn't it odd how these general rules we invent (such as "the world has always been this way") always turn out to have exceptions?

I guess what I'm hoping to accomplish with this thread is to see what the group thinks about both the general rule (it's always been this way) and these few exceptions.

Human intellectual progress in general, and progress in the arts and sciences in particular, has tended to be slow and painful and insignificant during the "always" times, and breath-taking in terms of speed and significance during the "exception" times.

At least, that is what I see when I scan the historical records. Does anyone else see this, too?


LB