Skip to main content

How Did Politics and Science Become Intertwined?

Politicized science and research did not begin in the United States. It began much earlier. For example, during the Black Plague of the 14th century, politicians together with doctors created a causation for the plague from 1347–1351. It was decided that the plague was caused by contagion and was attributed to public bathhouses, then very popular. Bathhouses everywhere were closed. The consequence was from that time on, for centuries, people were reluctant to take baths, except rarely.

The cause of disease even into the 19th century was said to be caused by “malaise” and this, supported by the government and physicians, implied little care could be given. At the time of the American Revolution, bloodletting was a prescription for fever. It worked by reducing the fever, but unhappily it killed many patients. This was supported by science and the government.

Without giving more examples, let’s fast forward to the 20th century with the development of the atomic bomb. This was co-produced project that involved famous people such as Albert Einstein, President Roosevelt, Robert Oppenheimer, and a cast of hundreds of scientists and military people.

There were conscientious objectors ( Einstein, and other scientists), and great supporters (e.g. Fermi, Bohr, et al.). But the politics swayed the development, together with massive money. Out of this came massive government funding for science projects. Thus, politics entered the door full time.

There have been mixtures of science and politics ever since. For example, the development of the Apollo project (land on the moon) began as a political goal and transferred to a massive enterprise to build it. In addition, huge funding to medicine created an entire infrastructure to cure various diseases. Which were funded was certainly politically influenced. Have you ever heard of an orphan disease? It is a disease that has little funding to cure. This was an intentional decision, partly influenced by politics. When funding agencies are awarded multiple billions to spend, politics is always involved in some way.

Now jump forward to current times, and we see a fusion of politicians and medicine, say with COVID. Here, plans were developed, complete with public announcements, about the new vaccine, including shutdowns, masks, unemployment, and much more. But we were never told the vaccines were not adequately tested.

You could combine this with climate change, promoted by the government and funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). I know this is a matter of belief to most, because the details of climate change and predictive modeling are most challenging, even mathematically challenging*. The latest is that some say there’s a climate crisis but some say no crisis. Who’s to say what the final chapter of this project will be? I don’t. But politics and science will be joined at the hip through it all.

Big money brings big politics!

*Challenging, as climate change sweeps across multiple areas of science, including ocean temperature and heat containment, ocean eddies, atmospheric reflectivity, CO2, aerosols, historical data, and even cloud cover.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behavioral Science and Problem-Solving

I.                                       I.                 Introduction.                Concerning our general behavior, it’s high about time we all had some understanding of how we operate on ourselves, and it is just as important how we are operated on by others. This is the wheelhouse of behavioral sciences. It is a vast subject. It touches our lives constantly. It’s influence is pervasive and can be so subtle we never notice it. Behavioral sciences profoundly affect our ability and success at problem-solving, from the elementary level to highly complex wicked problems. This is discussed in Section IV. We begin with the basics of behavioral sciences, Section II, and then through the lens of multiple categories and examples, Section III. II.     ...

Where is AI (Artificial Intelligence) Going?

  How to view Artificial Intelligence (AI).  Imagine you go to the store to buy a TV, but all they have are 1950s models, black and white, circular screens, picture rolls, and picture imperfect, no remote. You’d say no thanks. Back in the day, they sold wildly. The TV was a must-have for everyone with $250 to spend* (about $3000 today). Compared to where AI is today, this is more or less where TVs were 70 years ago. In only a few decades AI will be advanced beyond comprehension, just like TVs today are from the 50s viewpoint. Just like we could not imagine where the video concept was going back then, we cannot really imagine where AI is going. Buckle up. But it will be spectacular.    *Back then minimum wage was $0.75/hr. Thus, a TV cost more than eight weeks' wages. ------------------------- 

Principles of Insufficiency and Sufficiency

   The principles we use but don't know it.  1.      Introduction . Every field, scientific or otherwise, rests on foundational principles—think buoyancy, behavior, or democracy. Here, we explore a unique subset: principles modified by "insufficiency" and "sufficiency." While you may never have heard of them, you use them often. These terms frame principles that blend theory, practicality, and aspiration, by offering distinct perspectives. Insufficiency often implies inaction unless justified, while sufficiency suggests something exists or must be done. We’ll examine key examples and introduce a new principle with potential significance. As a principle of principles of these is that something or some action is not done enough while others may be done too much. The first six (§2-6) of our principles are in the literature, and you can easily search them online. The others are relatively new, but fit the concepts in the real world. At times, these pri...