issue 69 开头结尾很糟糕

fangjun91UID: 2808064

issue69 "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"

As scientific research and development usually funded by government, government always places excessive limitations on them. For example, government tends to fund scientific research whose achievement can be immediately applied to society. This pragmatism of government is deleterious in the long run. However, the freedom granted to researchers should not be boundless.

Research work is, in a sense, not well proposed action, but rather an exploration to the unknown world. The result can hardly be predicted beforehand. Nevertheless, government usually decides which project to invest on simply by practicability of research achievements. This is because government needs to please the voters and voters are often short-sighted.so the myopia of voters leads to flood of pragmatism in government. In retrospect, it is not rare that a seemingly futile research unexpectedly results in a breakthrough to the problem and changes the world. For example, the discovery of penicillin which is regarded as the most efficacious life-saving drug is attributed to a serendipitous observation by Alexander Fleming who wrote later on,"I did not plan to revolutionize all medicine by discovering the world's first antibiotic, or bacteria."But this is what he did. This illustrate that scientific research is sometimes like a gambling, and government should place fewer restrictions in order to win.

Government often imposed strict limitations on the researchers in the name of national security. Take USA for example, its government has restricted the flow of information on which the research depends. While scientific work is not isolated from each other and communication among researchers is a necessity, this policy closing off researchers in USA from the world in a futile effort to ensure security is doing more harm than good at present. In sum, government’s allergy toward national security bogs the scientific advancement with little benefits.

Though placing too many limitations on scientific research is detrimental and government should grant researchers more liberty of communication, of determination as discussed above, government should also impose some basic restrictions on the researchers to guarantee their projects being conducted complying with ethic rules and regulations. In many cases, eagerness of being succeful and curiosity about the result blind their eyes and entice them into researche that is anti-humanity. For example, a group of American medical researchers consciously, through prostitutes with syphilis, infected almost seven hundred people in Guatemala with two sexually transmitted diseases as they tried to determine whether penicillin cold prevent syphilis. What the researchers do is shocking: they misprice their victims’ rights and liberty and complete their research in the way regarded as “crime against humanity”. In this example, what if government in time thrust a hand in the program, or government verify the program more strictly? Those innocence residents would not have suffered from syphilis, which will cause blindness, mental illness and even death. Actually government should play a supervisory role to prevent researchers abusing their liberty.

In conclusion, government should place essential restrictions on research and development of science, if not so, researchers may misuse their rights, while limitation should not be excessive, as too many limitations hinder the development of science.