How Does Society Value Science?

1. How Does Society Value Science? David Boerner January 28, 2010

2. Policy = Decisions: Where are the scientists? • “Pure” Scientist • No interest in the situation, only interested in generating information Advocate • Makes the case for one policy direction Arbiter • Factually answers posed scientific questions Honest broker • Objectively generates and/or analyzes scientific knowledge for policy alternatives 2

3. How does society value science? To every man is given the key to the gates of heaven. The same key opens the gates of hell. Buddhist Proverb quoted by Richard Feynman 3

4. Framing any problem is a key cognitive challenge Imagine a deck of cards with numbers on one side and letters on the other Hypothesis: If D then 3 Which two cards would you check to test the Hypothesis? One card is trivial, and one other could be definitive. 4

5. Reframing the problem may make it trivial Imagine enforcing the legal drinking age in a bar by when you know either a patron’s age or beverage 5

6. Behaviour is predictably irrational • “A Conflict of Visions” (1987) • “Tragic” versus “Utopian” • Language • Decision Making • Knowledge • Freedom • Equality • Justice and Law • War, Crime and Punishment • Moral Duty • Control Twin, family and adoption studies imply political attitudes are 60% heritable! Thomas Sowell (1930 – ) 6

7. The Utopian Vision • George Bernard Shaw • “There is nothing that can be changed more completely than human nature when the job is taken in hand early enough.” • On the Rocks (1933) You see things as they are and ask, "Why?" I dream things as they never were and ask, "Why not?" Back to Methuselah (1921) George Bernard Shaw (1856 – 1950) 7

8. The Tragic Vision Walt Kelly (1913–1973) 1971 Human selfishness and cognitive biases are intrinsic, universal traits Our ability to change human nature is fundamentally limited 8

9. Language Tragic Utopian Evolved social process, with a complex, consistent inner logic, but not designed by any one person Perfectible: communication can be improved through refined use of precise, explicit articulation 9

10. Informing Decision Making Utopian Tragic Elite & Ideological Universities tend to rust explicitly articulated propositions from “experts” Inclusive & Experiential Think Tanks tend to trust knowledge that is distributed through society 10

11. Trusted Knowledge Sources Utopian Tragic Social experience of many from past events - recounted verbatim until systemically inculcated Articulated reason of experts – deliberate and ideological rationality - “age of reason” 11

12. Freedom Utopian Tragic One is able to achieve their goals – impediments can all be overcome One is able to pursue their goals – but caveat emptor 12

13. Equality Utopian Tragic Equalized probability of achieving the result Equalized opportunity for achieving the result 13

14. Justice and Law Tragic Utopian Fairness of process - to preserve precedent and tradition Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. - “The life of law has not been logic: it has been experience.” Fairness of results - for the individual Earl Warren – “But is it right? Is it good?” 1841-1935 1891-1974 14

15. War, Crime & Punishment Tragic Utopian Individuals will always put their own interests above those of others. Punishment is a deterrent to be demonstrated publicly. Inconceivable, the actor must not understand their actions. Since deterrence is useless, punishment is retribution that needs to be managed by the elite. 15

16. Moral Duty Tragic Utopian Fidelity, whether one understands why or not. Advocacy must represent knowing disloyalty Sincerity, one should aspire for higher ethical behaviour. Disingenuous behaviour is intentional and must indicate corruption or prejudice 16

17. Control Tragic Utopian Although inefficient and unstable, power should be distributed to prevent abuse Power should be concentrated for efficient central planning, stability and collective benefit 17

18. Perceptions of the other vision Utopians are Tragic Adherents are an “elite” operating in an extremely narrow reality, unable to recognize grave consequences or incredible costs of pursuing their goals “common” people, unable to understand how the world can be improved and unwilling to listen to experts 18

19. Perceptions of the other vision Utopians... Tragic adherents... must be naïve to not recognize their goals are unattainable and would require excessive social and economic costs with inconsequential benefits. must be stuck in the past, focused on understanding the trade-offs and avoiding the costs of change, rather than implementing attainable improvements. 19

20. Could the two visions be partially heritable? • The dopamine receptor gene (DRD2), A2 allele is significantly associated with political partisanship (much more than the A1 allele which results in a 30% reduction in D2 receptor density) – Dawes and Fowler (2009). • Genes associated with serotonin have been correlated with voter turnout Dopaminergic and serotonergic neurotransmitter systems play a vital role in the regulation of emotion and mood. Dopamine is associated with human reward systems, social attachments and cognitive function (attention, planning, visual processing and working memory) 20

21. Two extreme views of science Tragic Utopian Human nature makes ideal application of S&T impossible Too much training narrows focus and blinds one to other issues Human behaviour is immutable and flawed It always worked this way before Change is too difficult & expensive The “best” gets in the way of “what works” “If it isn’t broken, leave it alone” Science and technology can solve any problem Training an S&T elite is essential for creating leaders Human behaviour can be overcome and perfected Why not change/improve? Progress at any price The “best” is the only thing worth having “Improve it, even if it breaks” 21

22. How do Tragic adherents perceive science? Because science was deemed instrumental in winning WWII, Roosevelt asked Vannevar Bush for a science plan “Science, The Endless Frontier” was rejected (by Truman’s administration), but did result in the creation of NSF (which was meant to be the “National Research Foundation”), but Bush’s underlying ideology was widely adopted… > Development > Wealth Basic > Applied > Technology Vannevar Bush (1890–1974) & Francis Bacon (1561-1626) 22

23. What does the reservoir model mean? Research Information Reservoir Applications Benefits are predictable (linear) Any research funding results in wealth Research makes contributions to an “information reservoir” that accumulates over time Francis Bacon (1561-1626) 23

24. Yet a reservoir could have negative implications • “Plausible Deniability” • Leaves no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse • “Buyers” and “Sellers” have different knowledge (asymmetrical information) leading to • “Adverse Selection” • Sellers could be motivated to sell their “bad” products • “Moral Hazard” • Isolation from consequences could induce excessive risk-taking • Science is “Self-regulating” (expert review guides decision-making) 24

25. And we don't know what we don't know... “As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.” Donald Rumsfeld, Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense briefing 25

26. Does research deliver the promised benefits? • Booz-Allen-Hamilton (October 2005) found • 1000 largest R&D investors globally who spent 384B $US • 80-90% of corporate, 60% of all R&D globally “No relationship between R&D spending and the primary measures of economic or corporate success.” 26

27. Are the reservoir contents truly accessible? 27

28. And how much of the reservoir is “scientific”? Positive experimental testing outcomes can NOT confirm a scientific theory A single genuine counter-instance is logically decisive in showing the theory to be false Popper proposed a theory should be accounted scientific if, and only if, it is falsifiable. Karl Popper (1902 – 1994) "Our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite." 28

29. And the reservoir could be “contaminated” The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Science is punctuated by “Paradigm Shifts” Observed there is little evidence that scientists use Popperian falsification. Rather they tolerate contrary data until a ‘crisis’ ensues. Thomas Kuhn (1922 – 1996) “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."Max Planck 29

30. Are we promoting Utopian myths? • The myth of infinite benefit: • More science and more technology will lead automatically to more public good. The myth of unfettered research: • Any scientifically reasonable line of research is as likely to yield societal benefit as any other. The myth of accountability: • Peerreview and reproducibility of results are the principal ethical responsibilities of the research community. The myth of authoritativeness: • Scientific information provides an objective basis for resolving political disputes. The myth of the endless frontier: • New knowledge generated at the frontiers of science is autonomous from its moral and practical consequences in society. 30

31. Can science be better described? Research inspired by end use? No Yes Louis Pasteur “Use-Inspired” • Niels Bohr “Basic” Yes Research inspired by the quest for fundamental understanding? Thomas Edison “Applied” ? No Pasteur’s Quadrant - DonaldStokes, 1997 31

32. Is science best described by “motivations”? INVESTIGATOR-DIRECTED Heterogeneous / Serendipitous Orientation COLLEGES UNIVERSITIES PRIVATE SECTOR Benefits Shared Widely BASIC APPLIED Benefits Appropriated by Particular Groups GOVERNMENT LABS Strategic / Mission Orientation FUNDER-DIRECTED Peter Nicholson, 2009 32

33. Two Worlds, two Value Systems: Science and Policy • Understanding • Narrow/Deep versus Broad/Shallow • Communication styles and needs • Factual/Direct versus Perceptual/Nuanced • Preferred information sources • Experts (Peers) versus Society at large • Time constraints • Long Term versus Immediate • Dealing with uncertainties and conflict • Additional work versus Compromise and implement • Measures of success • Knowledge/Peers versus Societal acceptance/Political Masters 33

34. Will conflict always arise over science? • Conflict, yes but over visions, not science. • At the interface of Policy and Science I am trying to: • Understand, acknowledge and address the concerns of both visions, both want science... • Communicate to satisfy both audiences' information needs (difficult!) • Counter a Utopian tendency to revert to education and reasoning when they (I) “don’t understand” • Remember that these descriptions represent extremes – real people generally accept elements of both visions... 34

35. Thank you! For your attention and your willingness to listen Please remember – Statistics apply! Individuals generally display elements of both visions and We need both visions... 35