第一帖issue31

Adolph.hu.85UID: 2964075

31"Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the results of that research are controversial."



I totally disagree with the statement that" Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the results of that research are controversial", because that statement presented before us is only true on the surface, once the statement is discussed carefully and deeply, we will find there are some wrong ideas. i will give my explanation about it. But before my explanation, let's think about for a while the definition of research.

Research is the process of probing, and also a chief means by which humans carry out exploration on the inner principles of matters, of course, it needs much money to input. According to careful and exact research, we can know well how things get along with one another harmoniously, and efficient product maybe invented and our society will be greatly improved. Accordingly, sustainable development between us and the nature can undoubtedly achieve, with no damage to nature.

Since research is the process of probing essential law of nature, there is no assurance that the results of research are almost always correct, agreeable with the inner law of things, because everything has two faces, and we do not know the truth before nature. If we can understand the principles of all things, there is no need for us to do research. This is the uncertainty of nature. Since we can't hold the truth ahead of nature, we can't express one thing with almost, always. This is also the first point that i do not agree with the statement. As we all know, the investment spent on research with the results that agree with the inner principles of things, while maybe are controversial, is good investment. Relativity, for instance, has been rendered for more than a century, and is still full of disputes. while we can not say that the investment is not a good one, because relativity, the fundament of theoretical physics, still contributes to the development of physics and technology. as for those results congruous with the essential law of matters, even though are uncontroversial, the investment is not a good one. Take nuclear missile for example, there is uncontroversial that nuclear missile has so strong power that less than 10 missiles can destroy our home-earth. but do you admit the point that investment spent on such research is a good one? the answer is absolutely don't, because the research on nuclear missile is against with the essential principles of things, for nobody wants to destroy our earth. and this is the second point that i can’t accept the statement.

All in all, i disagree with the statement: for one thing, the use of" almost always" expresses the statement extremely, for there is too much uncertainty in universe. Secondly, there is something wrong with the standard by which we should not judge money spent on research is a good investment or not. The standard criterion should be whether the results of research are congruous with the essential principles of things.