The Scientific Mission and the Freedom of Research

Author(s):  
Arne Jarrick
Author(s):  
Brian Weatherson

Some writers have said that academic freedom should extend to giving academics complete freedom over what they choose to research. I argue against this: it is consistent with academic freedom for universities to hire people to research particular subjects, and to make continued employment conditional on at least some of the academic’s research being in the areas they were hired to work in. In practice, many academics think that their fellow academics should be free to choose to work on anything that’s within the disciplinary boundaries of the department they were hired into. I argue that’s both too narrow and too broad. Academic freedom implies that researchers should be allowed to have their research focus drift over time. But the boundaries of permissible drift do not correspond to anything like the boundaries of contemporary academic departments.


1987 ◽  
Vol 91 ◽  
pp. 233-240
Author(s):  
Virendra Nath Sharma

AbstractSawai Jai Singh, the statesman astronomer of 18th century India, designed instruments, built observatories, prepared Zīj, and sent a fact-finding scientific mission to Europe. His high-precision instruments were designed to measure time and angles with accuracies of ± 2 second, and ±1’ of arc respectively. The Ṣaṣṭhāmsa, a meridian dial with aperture, can still measure angles with precision of ± 1’ of arc. In the age of Newton and Flamsteed, Jai Singh and his associates remained medieval, in the tradition of Ulugh Beg, and did not initiate the new age of astronomy in the country. A complex interaction of poor communications, religious taboos, theological beliefs, national rivalries and plain simple human shortcomings are to be blamed for the failing.


Author(s):  
G. Bertin

If this paper were the first on African questions read before the Royal Asiatic Society, I should have to apologize for trespassing, but as our learned Honorary Secretary, Mr. Robert Oust, noticed,1 there is no African Society, and the Royal Asiatic Society has liberally opened its door to those who may bring information about the mysterious continent. For some time Africa has attracted so much attention that the Society in thus acting has been true to its scientific mission, and its Transactions contain already several most important papers on this interesting quarter of the globe.


2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-90
Author(s):  
Marko Ninkovic ◽  
Ruzica Glisic

A critical look at UNEP Reports concerning depleted uranium on Yugoslav territory is presented in this paper. The subjects of the analysis are summarized as remarks high-lighting the following three points: (a) those concerning the use of terms significant and insignificant doses (risks), (b) those concerning the use of 1 mSv as a border between these two risk types and (c) those concerning the composition of ex pert UNEP Teams investigating the depleted uranium issue. To start with, the assumption that it should be possible to express the risks (con sequences) caused by the in take of depleted uranium ( by ingestion/ inhalation and/ or external exposure) to b and g rays from depleted uranium as insignificant or significant for comparison purposes is, in our view, in collision with the linear non thresh old hypothesis, still valid in the radiation protection field. Secondly, the limit of 1 mSv per year as a reference dose level between insignificant and significant risks (con sequences) is not accept able in the case of military depleted uranium contamination. This is because the reference level of 1 mSv, according to the ICRP Recommendation, can be used in the optimization of radiation protection as an additional annual dose limit for members of the public solely for useful practices. Military usage of depleted uranium can not be classified as being useful for both sides - the culprit and the victim alike. Our third objection concerns the composition of ex pert UNEP teams for Kosovo (Desk Assessment Group, Scientific Reviewer Group, and UNEP Scientific Mission) as not being representative enough, bearing in mind all UN member-countries. This last objection may be rather difficult to understand for any one viewing it from the perspective other than that of the victims.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document