Disclaimer: Content on the YP4 blog does not necessarily reflect the views of Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation. The views, ideas, statements or claims posted on this site by members of the public cannot in any way be attributed to either Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation.
Moving Academic Research Into Projects
We have so many renowned colleges and universities with lots of research being done there, yet it seems that we have so many problems without a clear solution. Are we too theoretical and not practical enough? Should we have to decide between basic research and applied research because of lack of resources? How come the nation is now facing a major energy crisis and we seemed so unprepared to deal with it? If our scholars and technicians for years have been producing research and ideas about this issue, how come we do not a contingency plan or an organized response from the industry, the private sector, the governments and the citizens in general? While it is true that oil prices are determined on the world market, our domestic consumption is created and controlled by us.
Generally I do not like to give a whole lot of credence to conspiracy theorists, but it seems to me that someone, or some sector within our society, must have realized and foreseen the economic conditions that have been created by our dependence on foreign oil. I believe that someone must be profiting from this crisis.
We have to figure out how to rapidly move academic research into palpable projects in quick response to crisis. This must also include a change of values as a society. We need to shift our efforts to fulfill our greedy impulses into cooperation and innovation. There is not a disconnect between academic research and society's needs except for the lag time and the lack of incentives that exist between potential solutions created at our research centers and the implementation of projects. The private sector and the government have to be partners in the effort and provide funding for the production or the implementation of the results of the research. Our nation needs to become agile and learn how to rapidly respond to the challenges created by the global economy.
- Gabriela McCall-Delgado's blog
- Login or register to post comments
research
Ah, but Gabriela, I see a few incorrect assumptions in your first paragraph. You have, I suspect, noticed somewhere along the line that stated purpose and process sometimes bear little resemblance to real practices - and it's almost a sarcastic statement when the two patterns match. Then there is a range of experience - one business will have no "watercooler romances" except maybe a cartoon in the lunchroom, and another will be nothing but a hotbed of laziness and messy relationships - in reality, most situations do not meet either extreme. To be truly aware and yet maintain a reliable relationship of actions and words is truly to live a spiritual path, and is quite unusual today. It's what so many of us would like to find in Barack Obama, aware as we are of how very unusual that level of integrity is in our society. Just...be skeptical. When something is important to you, check to see if eye contact is avoided or if you have the sense that someone is trying to "sell" (convince by slanting or limiting information). See if the actions make sense. Then hear the words and see if they match. Be hopeful, but keep skepticism handy as a tool for reality-checking: doing so is a key part of intuition.
Now, about your specifics - theoretical research is at an all-time low in this country, which is a very large part of why we have now been surpassed scientifically. Industry funds practical research, to get tangible results - products or processes they can sell. A lot of money has gone into STOPPING development of alternative energy resources by those who profit from current sources (ie, oilmen, Cheney, et al). Much of that money went into politics (Cheney/Bush et al - why not impeach Bush? Well - do you REALLY want Cheney at the helm? That's scary.)
A lot of money was fed into government (political campaigns/lobbyists) to create the lack of appropriate research. Another related issue is the politicization of science, giving preference to belief over fact (at least when it fit the administration's goals).
Also, be very clear, our 21st Century oil wars have steeply influenced our cost for oil. Internationally, people take a very dim view of our intelligence for the inability to use basic reasoning and for our current leadership's apparent belief that bullying creates fact.
And now in paragraph two, you give the thoughtful answer. It sounds as though you are in the zone...where you realize the level of indoctrination in our education and news...and feel no more solid foundation in conspiracy than in accepting the status quo. Do you notice how often it seems that people are sleepwalking? I've notice it in heatwaves and heavily in the year after 9/11. In the first situation, people were exhausted, and in the second they were drained by fear. Yet, a lesser degree of that exists at other times.
It is very difficult to think freely when a pattern of assumptions has been deeply ingrained. I wish you success and support, as well as thoughtful companions along the way. Look for companions who are able to tolerate uncertainty. That is a key quality for you to remain aware.
Oh you darling! Incentives! Yes! You are thinking far more clearly than I, and I'd planned to sign off half an hour ago.
Reply to Research
Hi Carol,
Just to make the record clear, my blog is not making any assumptions in the first paragraph. My first paragraph is just an invitation to have a discussion on the issues it presents. I am not against basic research over applied research in the larger realm of academic research, for example I said "Should we have to decide between basic research over applied research in the larger realm of academic research because of lack of resources?" As you may see there are no advocacy words in the issues presented in the first paragraph, but mere neutral questions around the issue. My position, which you very well understand further down in your response blog is that corporate America and the government need to make available more resources to colleges and universities so that those colleges and universities continue producing the pieces of the puzzle we need to develop a response to the challenges we face. Nowhere in my blog do I mention that funding should be allocated with a preference to one type of academic research versus the other (basic vs. applied)-"The private sector and the government have to be partners in the effort and provide funding for the production or the implementation of the results of the research." My personal opinion on this issue, which was not stated in my blog because it was a mere invitation to have a discussion, is that we need both types of academic research, basic and applied research, basic research being the foundation of the other.
Both, the corporate and public sectors need to come up with a better manner in which they can coordinate, integrate and use that research being produced in a more efficient and time sensitive manner since in our modern world the timing of any response is so critical. Both sectors need to develop and integrate an approach to funding research in which the knowledge being created and/or uncovered by both basic and applied research can be used in practical solutions as soon as it is validated and feasible to use.
Finally, I just want to point out that there are people with disabilities such as autism and Asperger that do not make eye contact. It is part of their regular behavior due to their neurological diversity. Most Asperger are highly functional and very knowledgeable in particular areas of their interest, they are genuine, good and interesting people who will not look you in the eyes.
I agree, completely. I was
I agree, completely. I was very tired and didn't edit, just added on. However, with autism and Asperger's or other issues, power differentials, cultural differences, emotional issues, those are exceptions, flags to direct attention to the framework, in order to distinguish the message. And you are unlikely to find a person with Asperger's or autism in a high political office. There are some limits, less than we often think that they are. (New York's governor comes to mind.)
I noticed in college while in International Students Association that most local students inched away or almost trotted backwards while speaking with anyone from the middle east, unless they were seated. We sorted it out and made compromises, but I didn't see the issue in print until years later: social distance is a variable, and it is much closer there than here. What one saw as friendly, the other saw as intrusive.
Any "rules" for body language have to be only a starting point for observation and discussion, because we just aren't all alike (being all alike is, by the way, my personal vision of hell).
It is sometimes worthwhile to give a person room to prove you wrong. I have sometimes told someone that I held an opinion which disagreed with theirs, but that I would give them space to prove me wrong - and sometimes they have changed my ideas. That was based on evidence - behavior or other facts - not pressure. Always question an opinion gained through pressure. It will probably change when the pressure comes off.
My apologies. I should be nursing my cold, not rambling again. and I do respect the objectivity with which you presented the discussion. I need to go up the street and have a few rousing political discussions with my neighbor, so I can be more focused for class.