SDEST: The Military Roots of Basic Science: American Oceanography in the Cold War and Beyond

SDEST：基础科学的军事根源：冷战及之后的美国海洋学

• 批准号: 0115260
• 负责人: Naomi Oreskes
• 金额: $ 14.04万
• 依托单位: University of California-San Diego
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Continuing Grant
• 财政年份: 2002
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2002-01-01 至 2005-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0115260&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: SDEST; Military; Roots; Basic; Science

AbstractThe Military Roots of Basic Science:American Oceanography in the Cold War and BeyondNaomi OreskesAmerican oceanography was built on the twin pillars of military funding and logistical support. Before the 1930s there was no `blue water' oceanography in the United States, and the leaders of the field were to be found in England, Germany, and Scandinavia. By the late 1960s, American scientists were at the forefront of the field, and their work was instrumental in transforming human knowledge of the deep seas. This project is a historical study of how this transformation occurred: how oceanographers, working with military patrons motivated by national security concerns, produced the modern scientific understanding of the oceans, the sea-floor, and the processes that shape the surface of the earth. The outcome is a book of interest to historians, philosophers, and sociologists of science, to U.S. historians, and to scientists and science policy analysts. This project challenges the standard model of a causal arrow from basic to applied science. In Cold War oceanography, `application' drove science, not the other way around. Yet science was not impeded: these were years of multiple, profound discoveries. This challenges the deeply held conviction of most scientists that science must be unfettered to advance. It also challenges the Mertonian assumption that the free and open exchange of information is critical to scientific advance. The evidence from oceanography is against these convictions.However, while military patronage was good for oceanographic science, it was not always good for scientists. Costs were paid in human, intellectual, and political terms. Individual scientists had their careers derailed by security investigations, and women were excluded or marginalized in the Navy- science fraternity. Intellectually, the military agenda produced knowledge in many areas but left persistent ignorance in others. On the socio-political front, fifty years of military-scientific collaboration, in which scientists did not have to explain their work to a larger public, has left a legacy of distrust among the public, and a perception that scientists are now more self-interested than disinterested. A major contribution of the study will be an analysis of the lasting legacies of military patronage, in oceanography, and in American science. The insights offered by the project have significant implications, not only for our understanding of the history of science, but for future science policy and funding.

摘要基础科学的军事根源：冷战中的美国海洋学和北方俄勒冈州欧洲裔海洋学的海洋学建立在军事资金和后勤支持的双支柱上。 在1930年代之前，美国没有“蓝色水”海洋学，该领域的领导人在英格兰，德国和斯堪的纳维亚半岛被发现。到1960年代后期，美国科学家处于该领域的最前沿，他们的工作在改变人类对深海知识方面起了重要作用。该项目是一项历史研究，讲述了这种转变的发生方式：如何与国家安全关注的军事顾客合作，产生对海洋，海底的现代科学理解以及塑造地球表面的过程。结果是历史学家，哲学家和科学社会学家，美国历史学家以及科学家和科学政策分析师的感兴趣书。 该项目挑战了从基本科学到应用科学的因果箭头的标准模型。在冷战海洋学中，“应用”推动了科学，而不是相反。然而，科学没有受到阻碍：这些是多年的多年发现。这挑战了大多数科学家对科学必须不受限制才能进步的坚定信念。这也挑战了默顿人的假设，即自由和开放信息对科学进步至关重要。来自海洋学的证据是针对这些信念的。但是，尽管军事赞助对海洋科学有益，但对科学家并不总是有利的。成本是用人类，智力和政治术语支付的。个人科学家的职业生涯因安全调查而脱轨，在海军科学兄弟会中，妇女被排除或边缘化。从理智上讲，军事议程在许多领域都提出了知识，但在其他领域则持续无知。在社会政治方面，科学家不必向更大的公众解释他们的工作五十年，在公众中给予了不信任的遗产，并认为科学家现在比不感兴趣的科学家更加自私。该研究的主要贡献将是对海洋学和美国科学领域的军事赞助的持久遗产的分析。该项目提供的见解具有重大影响，不仅是我们对科学史的理解，而且是对未来的科学政策和资金的理解。