Science and Priorities

So Nancy and Caroline agree on throwing money at science.
Hmm... I might have considered this before
It's a bit like throwing shoes at failed Presidents. You can appreciate the sentiment but question the aim. I seem to remember, in this country, a certain Mr Wislon muttering about the white heat of the pound in your pocket. I think we have missed the trick here. Money thrown at science does not equal material progress. We need science to achieve intellectual, economic and humanitarian objectives. Science of itself will not:-
- reduce the number of human beings dying painfully and needlessly for want of the wherewithal to live sustainable, productive, and fulfilling lives;
- protect us against the destruction of the environment;
- protect us against the excesses of corrupt and totalitarian governments;
all of which come pretty high on my list.

One person's space programme is another country's supply of malaria nets for a generation.

I'm off to consult with the Stakhanovites of the Suffolk Couty Libraries to see if we can obtain this tome. It may offer a way to shape priorities internationally!
Thanks to John Naughton for the link.
-