The funding for postgraduate research is limited. Some people think that financial support from the government should only be provided for scientific research rather than research in other fields. Do you agree or disagree?
It is known that the postgraduate research has insufficient funding. Therefore, some people suggest that the government should provide all the financial support to scientific research rather than to other fields. It seems to me that this idea is totally unreasonable and biased.
The most important point is that sciences are not the only stimulator of social progress. Although in the current life, technologies and sciences are seemingly playing a major part, other fields such as music, sports, language, drawing and etc. are also contributing to our colourful life. If only sciences are guaranteed the chance for further study, the development of society would be abnormal, as we would be lack of spiritual cultivation even if we are in a highly mechanised society. I can imagine such a society is rigid, cold and lifeless.
Furthermore, the developments of all the fields are actually intertwined. Such a mindset should be a common sense to qualified scientists. For instance, the research into the effect of a new kind of medicine would take the psychological influences on test takers into account. An architect would also consider the aesthetic value when he is coming up with the best structure to allocate the weight of the whole building.
But it is fair to say that we should give more priority to a certain field in accordance to the social need. Government can put more money in to the most urgent research to make the best use of the research funding.
All in all, as the different fields are interrelated and all push our society forward, all of them should be the recipient of financial support. Meanwhile, we should be able to analyse the situation to find out and support the most needed ones.