model essay-issue 23

tesolchina_RAUID：3675555

Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.


I believe that scientific research and development should not be subject to any restrictions from governments.  I will first discuss why the governments should not place restrictions on research activities by considering the nature of the government and its threat to academic freedom.  Next, I will explain why such restrictions are not necessary by explaining how research activities are being monitored by funding agencies and ethical review committees.  

My first objection to government restriction is based on my skepticism of the power of governments in general and my belief in academic freedom.  As Thomas Paine famously put it, “Government, even in its best form, is a necessary evil.”  We allow the government to take away part of our freedom and property (via taxation) because some form of government is necessary to maintain the social order.  But the power of the government should be restricted; otherwise, the power will be abused by the government officials.  Since scientific research and development do not usually threaten the social order and national security, I believe that the government should not place any restrictions on them.  Meanwhile, the principle of academic freedom, which is the core values of higher education, also dictates that the government should allow maximum freedom for the scientists and researchers to pursue any projects they are interested in.  

Another reason why the government should not restrict scientific research is that research projects nowadays often have to go through lengthy processes of funding applications during which experts will evaluate the potential benefits and harms of the research.  If a research project carries certain risk or threat to public safety or national security, it is very unlikely that such projects would receive financial support from the funding agencies.  In other words, we should trust the scientific community itself to make sound decisions on whether or not a particular project should be supported or not.  Through the competitive processes for funding, projects that are potentially harmful will be stopped.  

Finally, it is important to recognize the importance of the ethical approval mechanisms that are in place to screen all research projects nowadays.  Before the researchers start any projects, they will have to submit a report to the ethical review committee of their institutions to get ethics approval.  Any projects that are ethically problematic or may threaten the public interests will not receive endorsement from the ethics committees.  As a result, such projects will not continue.  Again, the ethical approval mechanism is another example of how the scientific community itself can check the validity and soundness of the research projects without the need of government intervention.  

In conclusion, governments should not restrict research activities in any way because the power of the governments should be limited to the scope where government is necessary.  In addition, scientific research and development have already been subject to close scrutiny in funding applications and ethical review through which potentially harmful or dangerous projects will not be approved or supported.  

issue范文与提纲目录(tesolchina)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mo ... amp;fromuid=3675555