While old science seems to have had greater total, bulk impact on the world than new science, I have polemically overblown the independence factor. “Gentleman scientists” were few, most scholars had patrons of some kind.
It was more of an invitation to consider non-donation-based funding models. We have evidence that part-time scientists can do great work. Wouldn’t it be better if researchers spent their non-scientific hours together producing short-range value rather than fight each other over grants and tenure?
I think part-time science is a cool idea. I would like that, rather than a full-time corporate job (as I have now) or a full-time science job.
There are disadvantages of course—science requires an awful lot of time investment—but it might get scientists out of their ivory tower (without corrupting them or killing their time with fund-raising).
I’ve seen (I forget where) an organization where people can make charitable donations directly to science. This sounds like it ought to be the third component of how science gets funding (the first two being government and technology companies.) If enough people are passionate about space exploration, for instance, but government and industry are dragging their feet, then enthusiastic laymen should be able to pool money to fund research.
While old science seems to have had greater total, bulk impact on the world than new science, I have polemically overblown the independence factor. “Gentleman scientists” were few, most scholars had patrons of some kind.
It was more of an invitation to consider non-donation-based funding models. We have evidence that part-time scientists can do great work. Wouldn’t it be better if researchers spent their non-scientific hours together producing short-range value rather than fight each other over grants and tenure?
I think part-time science is a cool idea. I would like that, rather than a full-time corporate job (as I have now) or a full-time science job. There are disadvantages of course—science requires an awful lot of time investment—but it might get scientists out of their ivory tower (without corrupting them or killing their time with fund-raising).
I’ve seen (I forget where) an organization where people can make charitable donations directly to science. This sounds like it ought to be the third component of how science gets funding (the first two being government and technology companies.) If enough people are passionate about space exploration, for instance, but government and industry are dragging their feet, then enthusiastic laymen should be able to pool money to fund research.