2026-10-22: I found these old writings when I was cleaning up some stuff and added them here.
Read more…
The topic is about the restrictions and limitations imposed on scientific research by government of that area, it states that very few restrictions, if any at all, should be placed on researches and all researches being conducted should be allowed a free rein. I think that this will be the ideal condition that a researcher would like to have but are not that easy for any government to fulfill.
First we need to analyze which resources are the ones where strictest restriction should be observed, i.e. - human testing, usage of unique equipment and money. These are the three places where highest amount of control should be exerted. Human testing should be higly restricted since the value of human life is considered to be above all and its loss is the least wanted ocurrence. Next come unique equipments, their usage has to be kept a check upon because their availability is nowhere near to matching their demands. There will always be people who want to use them. So they should only be assigned to researches for a fixed period of time in a pre-decided order. The last comes the question of money. It is the universal resource which has capability to buy nearly everything else. Money supply is restricted by the government since it is not something they have in infinite amounts and there are other areas where they have to allocate the amount gathered by via taxes. Government is the one responsible to make sure even the poorest under its jurisdiction doesn't sleep hungry. That causes the government to put a check on the money issued for research. Therefore government should put restrictions upon researches which either may harm humans or it requires some unique equipment access or it requires money which government doesn't deem it worthy of having.
Now let's talk about how the government decides as to which research should be restricted and which not. The three major points upon which this is centered are "whom does the research benefit" and "how long before the research's return on investent(ROI) start coming in" and "in how much quantity". Government would obviously want the people under its jurisdiction to be benefitted first, therefore a program which helps other countries while causing some harm to its host country will be less likely to be allotted resources over a program which is directly beneficial to the residents of that country. Next two points are analysed in tandem and researches are evolved upon a combination of those, i.e.- a research providing high ROI in near future is much more favorable when compared to a low ROI research which will take more time in starting to bear fruit. The case gets complicated when we have to compare something with high time and high ROI against something with low ROI in much shorter time.
In conclusion what I would like to say is only that restrictions must be put on a research which either harm the human/monetary resource. And deciding which research gets priority should be done according to the three questions suggested in the previous paragraph.