Issue 31_求大家批改意见

GabrielGaoUID: 2800551

Money spent on research is almostalways a good investment, even when the results of that research arecontroversial.


请大家指教。谢谢。


It is sometimes easier for people to earn money thanspend money. Undoubtedly, money spent on research regardless of its outcome isgenerally a wise investment. The nature of investment is to use money to makemore, and new products brought by new research can meet this requirement.However, careless investment on research is by no means beneficial. Also, if wecan foresee the danger of any controversial project but still invest on it, wewill only end up with self destruction.


Investment cannot exist without risk. And investmenton research is not an exception. In fact, scientific research also has risk anduncertainty. After all, there are myriad of examples of how success comes afterfailures. In this sense, this makes investment on research more risky. Butshould we hesitate too much and spend money begrudgingly to the world ofscience? I think the answer is negative. Requiring scientists to guarantee theresult or research outcome is neither realistic nor fair. After all, what a researcherfaces is usually an unknown forest of information and knowledge, and it isimpossible to ask for a specific map informing the direction to the end of theforest beforehand.  Therefore, anyresearch cannot be roughly judged by its controversial nature or not beforescientists delve into it.


Furthermore, many new ideas, new discoveries and newproducts are made by chance, sometimes with sudden inspiration. It is true thatresearch is done with determination and persistence, but we cannot deprecatethe contribution made by other fantastic outcomes that disobey its original planning,such as the discovery of penicillin and Pasteurian disinfection method. That isto say, it is wise to make investment with moderate confidence to the research,in a sense that some surprise might happen. In short, financial planner cannotlimit the money given to scientists only because there are chances that theremight be failures and controversies. Once a great discovery is made, it is destinedto make the investment worthwhile.


Onthe other hand, money spent on research with benevolent motivation can be awaste of money if spent without discretion and regulation. Risk management is thereforeneeded for a better regulation in scientific research and projects. Sometimes,many scientists will initiate redundant research only on the popular industries,such as bioengineering and solar energy. Without a prudent regulation, manyprojects will overlap with each other, causing a waste of investment inexperiment facilities and human resources. Excessive research is not the onlyproblem, since there are times when corruption happens in the holistic field ofscience. For example, some professors might use the money for research to bribebusinessmen and government officials to earn more investment on their project.For most of the time, this kind of investment will cause more harm thanbenefits.


Someresearch that is definitely controversial by nature can be malicious to thewelfare of all human being. This is another reason why we should impose strictbut reasonable regulation on them to evaluate the motivation, development and futureof a research project. The research on nuclear bomb is a typical example since itsidentity is of so much criticism that many scientists, including Einstein, didnot want to be involved with. But the dilemma is that people need it to end theSecond World War soon. Later, people found out that the desperate research onnuclear weapon created tension and horror during the Cold War. Now massivedestructive weapon becomes the tool for terrorists to endanger the security ofa peaceful nation and safety of innocent people. This illustrates the pointthat we need a close scrutiny over the research on these evil sciences. And anyrampant investment on these fields will be unwise.


Insum, a careful investment on researches regardless what kind of outcome it canyield is required, but only under prudent and well-established regulationsystem. Without this premise, controversial science patronized by evil peoplecan lead to disasters too all human beings.
(Words:662)