Well certainly that's because politicians are not scientists. Assuming we had infinite money and resources, scientists would not need to request grants from institutions.
In a perfect world, we would have no need for politicians because all desires would be maintained and there would be no competition over resources. A politician's job is to serve the greatest vocal majority, or the welfare of the people as a whole (if the majority is not acting in their own best interest).
However, science is squashed by these vocal majorities, as well as by politicians who don't understand the importance of the undergoing scientific research. I believe that it is ignorance which is the greatest enemy of science, not politics.
It's a shame that we have to resort to pandering in order to receive funding.
Comments
Well certainly that's because politicians are not scientists. Assuming we had infinite money and resources, scientists would not need to request grants from institutions.
In a perfect world, we would have no need for politicians because all desires would be maintained and there would be no competition over resources. A politician's job is to serve the greatest vocal majority, or the welfare of the people as a whole (if the majority is not acting in their own best interest).
However, science is squashed by these vocal majorities, as well as by politicians who don't understand the importance of the undergoing scientific research. I believe that it is ignorance which is the greatest enemy of science, not politics.
It's a shame that we have to resort to pandering in order to receive funding.
social constructivism is at odds with science. democratic politics is social construcivism by your own admission.