After the end of World War II, the famous American scientist and engineer Van Neva Bush wrote a report on the development of science in the United States at the request of President Roosevelt - Science, the Endless Frontier. This report later became a milestone in U.S. science and technology policy, and the most immediate result was the establishment of the National Science Foundation. Although there is constant controversy and discussion of the views, this also reflects the lasting influence and strong vitality of the report. Its successor, the Endless Frontier Act, was recently voted in the U.S. Senate to invest in emerging science and technology to keep the United States at the forefront of science, with China as its number one adversary.
In recent years, as the relationship between China and the United States has continued to change, especially in the field of science, the "stuck neck" problem has emerged, and we have to think again about science and policy. Just then, a new version of the report was published in the United States, and a new Chinese translation of Science: Endless Frontiers was brought with it, along with an expanded commentary from several leading figures in the tech industry, including Huawei President Ren Zhengfei. To understand the development ideas of American science and technology, it is inseparable from this report. What is more practical is that it gives us an opportunity to understand and think about scientific problems, that is, about the function, planning and implementation of science. As the so-called knowing oneself and knowing the other, reading this book is a good start.
[US] Van Neva Bush [US] Rush Translated by D. Holt by Cui Chuangang
Chushin Publishing Co., Ltd. May 2021 edition
Go to "Back to Park", click "Watching" and post your thoughts to the message area, as of June 6, 2021 at 12:00 noon, we will select 2 messages, each person will give a book.
Written by | Ji Yang (Institute of Semiconductors, Chinese Academy of Sciences)
Is science useful? Do you want to support scientific research? If so, how do you support it?
By science, we mean science in a broad sense, that is, science and technology: the task of science is to know nature, and the function of technology is to transform nature—"Philosophers only explain the world in different ways, and the problem is to transform the world." ”
But anyone who has a little interest in science has more or less thought about the above three questions. These questions don't seem too difficult, but their answers depend on the times and positions. Because scientific research is an action, this action has a subject and an object, and the object is obviously the nature and human world waiting to be recognized and transformed, but the subject is often ignored consciously or unconsciously: those who engage in scientific research and those who support scientific research.
Is science useful? Everything is to talk about utilitarianism, "I can't learn too much and forget my feelings", and when it comes to science, it is natural to ask, who pays? Who benefits? If it is you who give and benefit, the question of whether science is useful or not is not a problem. "Science for science's sake" or "to get the miserly approval of a few of your peers in the world" are your own private affairs — the latter two questions are certainly not problems.
Science doesn't do much good, and the answer a hundred years ago was basically that. So, in 1914, the British did not hesitate to send their greatest physicist to the forefront—his name was Moseley, Rutherford's most illustrious student, who used X-rays to study the mysteries of atoms, who regarded the Nobel Prize as a probe, but soon died on the battlefield.
Science is useful, of course, to support – that's the answer given by the two world wars. In the 1940s, the United States recruited thousands of scientists and engineers, not to put them on the front lines, but to do scientific research, military-related research — we support science, but we only support science that is useful to us.
The invention of radar and the atomic bomb largely determined the outcome of the war, so in 1944, when the Allies saw the dawn of victory, U.S. President Roosevelt asked his scientific adviser, Van Neva Bush, to answer a third question about how to continue to support scientific research after the war—and of course some ways of supporting it had been explored in the course of the war, but they were not necessarily applicable in peacetime.
Bush's response was the famous report Science: The Endless Frontier, "the pioneering work of American science policy and one of the core sources that have influenced American history." Since its publication in 1945, the book has been reprinted many times, and the Chinese translation has been in more than one edition. The science: Endless Frontiers, published this year by CITIC Press, and the New Edition of Princeton University Press, Science, the Endless Frontier, were basically published at the same time. In addition to Bush's report that year, the English version includes R. Holt, former CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. D. Holt) wrote an article, The Science Bargain, which judges the successes and failures of Bush's report and the new challenges facing the United States today from a favorable perspective 75 years later. In addition to translating these two articles, the Chinese edition (translated by Cui Chuangang) also uses the praise of 22 celebrities at the front of the book - 14 from China (including Ren Zhengfei and Shi Yigong), 8 from the United States (5 less than the 13 in the original book, I guess it may be because their feelings did not have time to catch up with the translation as Chinese), and at the back of the book, the review articles of 10 celebrities in China are used, the most famous of course is Ren Zhengfei of Huawei.
Bush's report is actually very short, and everything it says seems to be common sense today. As you can imagine, Roosevelt's question is certainly not as straightforward as I said above, and Bush's answer is equally righteous and subtle—it seems to me to be a bargain: science is useful, of course you have to support, you have supported science that is useful to you, and now it is time to support some science that is useful to me. Bush is fighting for more freedom for scientific research, and his opponents argue that "Bush's call for intellectual freedom is a cynical idea, an attempt to evade the scrutiny that is often done with government funding." (Endless Frontier: The Biography of Bush, p. 339)
Bush's report is only a general outline that answers four specific questions raised by Roosevelt. For each specific issue, there is also a report of a special committee. Neither the original book from Princeton University Press nor the translation by CITIC Press include these reports, and you may think they are outdated. The 75th Anniversary Edition published by the Natural Science Foundation of America (NSF) in 2020 and the Chinese translation published by Business Press in 2004 ("Science: Frontiers without End", translated by Fan Dainian and Xie Daohua, etc.) have all the contents of these professional committee reports, and interested readers can find them to read.
Historically, the report has gained a great reputation, but it has not lived up to Bush's expectations. By the time the report was completed, Roosevelt had passed away, and the new president, Truman, didn't have a good feeling for Bush, a wartime scientific adviser—when he was vice president, he didn't even know there was a "Manhattan Project" for the atomic bomb, and Bush was the real director of the project: General Groves and Dr. Oppenheimer, whom we often hear, were actually under his command! Therefore, after 5 years and 4 confrontations in the Senate, this report can be regarded as some implementation, and the result is the establishment of the American Natural Science Foundation.
The most critical factor in this process is, of course, the trust between scientists and governments. Scientists should not expect government funding if they want to entertain themselves; governments who want to lead the enemy in war technology cannot do without the help of scientists. When the special period of war has passed, scientists and the government will have to readjust their relations with each other, and bush's report is an attempt at this effort.
The book Endless Frontier: Vannevar Bush, Engineer of the American Century tells the story of how Bush, a man who made great achievements in science (in fact, engineering), gradually established contacts with the military and government, gained mutual trust, and finally became the top science management expert in the United States during the war; as the leader of the United States Bureau of Scientific Research and Development. How he played a great role as a scientist and engineer in the field of military technology. Only by understanding these things can you have a deeper understanding of the background and significance of the Bush report.
The Bush report has been reprinted many times, and whenever it gets high-profile publicity, it's because American science faces new challenges. The report was submitted in 1945 in response to the new post-war situation; the NSF was established in 1950, which certainly had the factors of the Soviet Union's success in developing the atomic bomb; in 1960, probably because of the Soviet-American space race caused by the Sputnik satellite; 1980 was one of the most critical periods of the US-Soviet confrontation, the beginning of the last decade. Fast forward to 2020, the 70th anniversary of the NSF, the 75th anniversary of the Bush Report, and the new challenges facing American science – that's why we see these new versions. (As recently as May 2021, the U.S. Senate passed the Endless Frontier Act.)
At the same time, China is also facing a new era, which is why there is a new translation of CITIC Publishing House. The Bush report certainly has historical significance, and Holt's introduction certainly provides a new interpretation, but I don't think it's really important. I read the praise at the front of the Chinese translation and the extended commentary at the back, and the general impression is that the book brings more to China is "Yinshu Yanyue", or "borrow other people's wine glasses and pour your own blocks." "Maybe only two or three people have actually read and thought about Bush's report, and more often than not, they have expressed their views on this topic." Even Ren Zhengfei's emphasis in "Breaking the Sky Upwards, Rooting Down" that "the most important thing in scientific discovery and technological innovation is tolerance", it seems that it is only to tolerate those "failures" that have not yet succeeded for the time being, and they are all examples of final success. Let alone anything else. Everyone understands the truth, and whether or not you can do it is another matter. Everyone has their own troubles, so you may wish to refer to this book and find an angle that suits your own elaboration.
Moreover, planning is one thing, implementation is another. Bush's report talked about so much that I suddenly remembered another famous scientific planning report, China's "Long-term Plan for the Development of Science and Technology 1956-1967." The report, which can be found on the Ministry of Science and Technology's website, is about 50,000 words, about the length of the Bush report. From an implementation perspective, it may be better than the Bush report. My Government has always paid attention to scientific planning, and every few years a new report will be set up to summarize the implementation of the previous report - so that we can see the successful landing of Tianwen-1 on Mars today. However, China's science policy also has an overly utilitarian side, always worried that "what is raised is not used, what is used is not raised", and some unhurried tasks are ignored. Therefore, "two bombs and one satellite" solved the national defense problem, and many years later there were embassies in the South China Sea; "market for technology" solved commercial problems, and many years later there was ZTE Huawei.
At this critical moment of the "great rejuvenation of Chinese civilization", everyone who cares about science will think about the three questions raised at the beginning of this article: Is science useful? Do you want to support scientific research? If so, how do you support it? Everyone also tries to give their own answers. Reading the book Science: The Endless Future, and several others related to it, may be a good start for many.