The Motives of Scientists

Although some scientists claim they are motivated by “curiosity” or by a desire to “benefit humanity”, it is easy to see that neither of these can be the principal motive of most. As for “curiosity”, that notion is simply absurd. It isn’t logical, as most work on highly specialized problems, that don’t relate, nor are the object of ‘normal’ curiosity.

Would an astronomer, mathematician, or entomologist excite the world of the uninformed on any of these subjects, to feel secure that the research was for “curiosity”?

Suppose that a lack of funds for post-graduate education, would lead some of them to become an insurance broker instead of an astronomer, mathematician, chemist or entomologist.  Would that “curiosity” exist in insurance matters?  Why then berate an important quest, using the term “curiosity”?

The “benefit of humanity” explanation doesn’t work any better.  Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the human race i.e. archeology or comparative linguistics because although each are have a bonanza of information when viewed objectively, but, all to often this is not the case. It depends on who is funding the exhibitions and the information found then becomes skewed. Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities, yet, scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their work, i.e. developing vaccines and drugs termed wellness motivated.

Was Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear power plants, really motivated by his ‘curiosity’ or benefiting humanity?  If he was such a humanitarian than why did he help develop the H-Bomb?..read more in the book.

Convinced? Don’t miss this must-read book in these perilous times!

Get it now!