"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:48da7b0b$1@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > But science, as an institution, needs to
> > develop a conscience, a scale of proportion, and prioritization.

> Nonsense. Listen to yourself.
>
> Science doesn't think - scientists do.

And government doesn't govern, people do. Universisties don't teach, people
do. Nations don't war, people do. Sure, at one level. At another level,
taking organizational structure of humans, governments govern, universities
teach, nations fight, and science makes policies and decisions. I thought
the level of abstraction was clear from the inclusion of "as an
institution".

> It's OK for all the politicians to be corrupt, too, as long as the
> government itself isn't corrupt?

The checks and balances system is precisely there to prevent individual
corruption affecting the government. Whether you think it works or not is
open for debate. Personally, I don't think it works in most governments, and
it doesn't work in most scientific institutions. We could make this a
political discussion, but I prefer to discuss the scientific policies
instead on this thread. Scientists are as much capable as making bad choices
and decisions as politicians, but while it's fashionable to discuss the
corruption and selfishness of politicians, it seems to be a taboo to express
displeasure with wastefulness of scientists.

Post a reply to this message