In a perfect world, I agree with you. I just can't see it
  happening on this planet, with these humans, pretty much ever
  tongue emoticon

  But yes, I'd love to see monastery-scientists like days of yore,
  before the University system was secularized and truth for the
  sake of truth (which was usually to discern the mind of God but
  it amounts to the same thing to me - nature, God, whatever
  tongue emoticon )

  At the same time, imagine the complaicency that might set in,
  were the Sciences divorced from society at large? No one to
  answer to. No one to correct mistakes. No one to call "BS" or
  "Justify Thyself!" on occasion, except those within the same
  universe.

  Ensuring the passion remains alive is what is needed, imo, if a
  pure science culture was to happen. I'd like to see the money
  part taken away, along with other things, or at least reduced in
  significance.

  I believe a *different* measure of accountability to the outside
  world would be required. Not all of the time, but on occasion.
  Even Realists need a Reality check tongue emoticon There's no
  way to guarantee the passion, as intent is not possible to
  determine at present.

  Science needs to remain linked up to society just not monetarily
  or politically. Any group of people working outside of the
  bounds of society with excessive power can lead to all the same
  human frailties coming through.

  Different watchers I suppose. Not the ones we have not but
  someone else for different reasons. I suppose that's the idea
  behind the Journal System in a way.

You are viewing proxied material from sdf.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.