LETTERS
Socialistic theories D E A R SIR:
Your editorial of May 23 deserves a rebuttal, and being a chemist and not an economist, this is a difficult task. However, for those who do not believe the "socialistic theories" of yours, I recommend reading "The Failure of the New Economics" (Van Nostrand, 1959). Unfortunately, when a set of ideas gains political implementation—as Keynesianism got itself installed in the whole New Deal-Great Society trend in the U.S.A.—there is a vested interest and moment at the political level which intellectual demolition does not affect for decades, or possibly a generation. I take it that you are arguing for increased government money to be employed for research in science and technology, on the grounds that an advance in our standard of living will thereby evolve in a sort of geometrical progression. It is certainly true that when a government spends a lot of money in a given area, that area will flourish. This is the visible part of the process. A government power project can be photographed. The people who benefit from it are aware of their benefits because the plus side of every government spending program is focused and localized and affects a comparatively few people. The minus side, on the other hand, is widely dispersed. Very few people are aware that they have been hurt by being deprived of a portion of their income, and those who are aware have no means of raising much of an outcry. Tracing the unseen injury—the minus side of government interventionism— is the job of the good economist, and Henry Hazlitt has spelled this out at some length in his little book entitled "Economics in One Lesson." Economics deals with scarce goods. If more money and machines are used to produce automobiles, these same resources are not now available to build airplanes or homes or boats or agriculture equipment. If a large portion of our resources is redirected by government into scientific research, these resources are withdrawn from other sectors of our society. If you argue that this will improve our well-being in the end, what about the obvious fact that the well-being of many people is being impaired right now by virtue of money being taken from them by government for this project or that? Once we acquiesce in the first step—that is, of permitting or encouraging the national government to gather $110 billion or so annually from its citizens6 C&EN AUG. 15, 1966
then political battles are fought to determine who shall benefit from the spending of this enormous amount of money. Let's suppose that the scientific community acquires a lot of political expertise and gets both front feet in the public trough. Even if it is so "lucky," it may not be resolving the problem for which it originally sought the money. In the Dec. 6, 1965, issue of U.S. News and World Report, Warren Weaver, recent president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, had this to say about scientific discovery: "We are suffering from the idea that if you've got enough money, some way or other you can conquer any problem. That just isn't the way things get done in the scientific world. If you think of great discoveries in science and how they came about, you find the great ideas arise when you give freedom—freedom to think, freedom from other pressures —to individuals of great intellectual capacity, of imagination, of dedication, and let them be motivated primarily by their curiosity to find how nature operates." Some years earlier, in an address entitled "The Professions in Society" made to a physicians' group, the eminent jurist Roscoe Pond had this to say about the dangers of science becoming dependent on government handouts: "Under a system by which local funds for research . . . are derived from the national capital even the small part allocated to a locality imposes a kind of censorship on the local authorities. In their eagerness to share in the government distribution, local officials are loath to make statements or espouse ideas . . . in conflict with the scientific doctrines that its bureaus advocate. Government propaganda goes on upon a large and increasing scale, and dissent is silenced. The effect of this upon a learned art pursued in the spirit of a public service cannot fail to be destructive. How can scientists disagree with governmentpromoted doctrines, how can advocates stand up against arbitrary bureaucratic administrative action, how can teachers teach the truth against officially approved doctrines when disagreement means failure to get government grants for research or government subsidies for the institution in which one is employed, or government appointments or assignments to a salaried position?" At this point I suppose one should broaden the inquiry and demonstrate that science really depends for its vigor on a society whose cultural values are in healthy shape. This is suggested
CHEMICAL AND ENGINEERING NEWS 1155 Sixteenth St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Editor: GORDON H. BIXLER Managing Editor: Kenneth M. Reese Assistant Managing Editors: Chester Placek, Arthur Poulos Art Director: Joseph Jacobs Assistant Art Director: Leroy L. Corcoran Senior Editors: Walter S. Fedor (New York), David M. Kiefer (Washington) Senior Associate Editor: Earl V. Anderson (New York) Supervisory Associate Editors: James H. Krieger, Brendan F. Somerville Associate Editors: James L. Hall, Melvin J. Josephs, Arnold E. Levitt, Margaret S. McDonald, Howard J. Sanders Assistant Editors: Kathryn Campbell, Joyce A. Richards Editorial Assistants: Robert C. Berlo, William F. Fallwell, Thomas E. Feare, Robert I. Fuchs. John C. Keresztesy, Jr., Carol J. Swartz Editorial Reference: Barbara A. Gallagher Art and Production Staff—Washington: Production Manager: Clarence L. Rakow Art: Melvin D. Buckner Production Staff—Easton: 20th & Northampton Sts., Easton, Pa. Associate Editor: Charlotte C. Sayre Editorial Assistant: Stephanie Bertsch NEWS BUREAUS 733 Third Ave., New York, N.Y. 10017 Bureau Head: Kenneth A. Kovaly Assistant Editors: John J. Elsbree, Peter E. Finlay Editorial Assistants: Angela P. Candela, Frank S. Morehouse Philadelphia National Bank Building Broad & Chestnut, Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 Editorial Assistant: Jon E. Browning 530 William Penn Place, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15230 36 South Wabash Ave., Chicago, III. 60603 Bureau Head: Donald J. Soisson Assistant Editor: Peter M. Heylin 1367 East Sixth St., Cleveland, Ohio 44114 Editorial Assistant: Peter J. Piecuch 57 Post St., San Francisco, Calif. 94104 Assistant Editor: Dermot A. O'Sullivan 422 South Western Ave., Los Angeles, Calif. 90005 Assistant Editor: Richard T. Mitch 514 Main Bldg., 1212 Main St., Houston, Tex. 77002 Bureau Head: Bruce F. Greek Washington News Bureau 1155—16th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. Bureau Head: Louis A. Agnello Congressional Specialist: George B. Krantz Assistant Editor: Wilbert C. Lepkowski Foreign News Bureaus Frankfurt/Main, West Germany Grosse Bockenheimerstrasse 32 Assistant Editor: H. Clifford Neely London, W.C.2, England, 27 John Adam St. Assistant Editor: Michael K. McAbee Tokyo, Japan Apt. 306, Prince Mansion 15 6-Ban, 7-Chome Akasaka Minato-ku, Tokyo Bureau Head: Patrick P. McCurdy Advisory Board: Raymond F. Baddour, Herman S. Bloch, Walter M. Carlson, Herbert D. Doan, William D. Emmons, Alfred B. Garrett, Walter R. Guyer, Charles J. Jelinek, Marshall Nirenberg, Royston M. Roberts, Frederick D. Rossini, Wayne D. Staley, Harold E. Thayer, Ervin R. Van Artsdalen, Robert R. White American Chemical Society Publications Director of Publications: Richard L. Kenyon Assistant Director of Publications: Richard H. Belknap Director of Business Operations: Joseph H. Kuney Executive Assistant to the Director of Publications: Rodney N. Hader Assistant to the Director of Publications: William Q. Hull
by Paul Anderson in an article which appeared in the Saturday Review (April 27, 1957) entitled "How Social Is Science?" Prof. Anderson writes that the scientific method's ancestry is obscure, but may to a large degree be the triad: accumulated technology, Christian respect for order and theory, and a vigorous practical-minded capi talism. With these several scattered com ments I think I have only begun to scrape the surface of my differences with the editorial. The editor seems to have accepted all the wrong prem ises, as most socialistic educators of today, and therefore come up with all of the wrong conclusions. The material I have used can be ob tained from The Foundation For Eco nomic Education, Irvington-On-Hudson, N.Y. 10533. It is well worth reading. G. CHRISTIAN GUVERNATOR, III
Overland Park, Kan.
CA vs. anonymous patents D E A R SIR:
The complaint by Gerson and Bachmann (C&EN, July 11, page 6) that U.S. inventors are deprived of credit when their work first becomes known through abstracts of the Dutch and Belgian patents is entirely justified. The problem could be easily overcome if CA arranged with the leading cor porate patent departments for an identification of the inventors. Since we, the patent attorneys, are most concerned about receiving the intelli gence promptly, we owe it to the scientific community to help to assure to our inventors the recognition they deserve. H E L M U T H A. W E G N E R
Chicago, III.
D E A R SIR:
I disagree strongly with the opinion of Mr. Gerson and Mr. Bachmann that CA should wait until a patent listing inventors should issue to publish an abstract of the patent. To delay the issue of scientific information for reasons of vanity or personal ag grandizement is not justified. I feel that I am justified to complain be cause I also have had foreign patents issue without my name as inventor. The authors are also wrong, at least in the case of U.S. inventors, in saying that Belgian patents do not list inven tor's names. Practically all Belgian patents of U.S. origin contain the priority date of the application in the U.S., giving the serial number and the inventors' names. Also Belgian pat
ents are more likely to issue first be cause they can issue three to six months from after filing in Belgium, whereas Dutch patents issue 18 months from the first filing date in a convention country. A majority of U.S. companies who file in Holland also file in Belgium; thus in the ma jority of cases the inventors' names can be found, and when they are present CA publishes them.
OTTHAS DISCOVERED THEONEVWY TO OVERCOME UGLY ADS!
HARRY D. W I L L I A M S
Penns Grove, N.J.
D E A R SIR:
The letter of Gerson and Bach mann (C&EN, July 11, 1966, page 6) speaks of the "callous procedure" of some foreign countries which do not reveal the name of patentees, and at tributes a like callousness to Chemical Abstracts when such patents are ab stracted without giving the inventors' names. Essentially Gerson and Bachmann, by means of their published letter, are trying to pressure Chemical Abstracts and its users into joining forces with them against certain foreign patent rulings which differ from U.S. Patent Office practices. Several very honest reasons have dictated the policies of patent offices in foreign countries (not only of Bel gium and the Netherlands) which do not reveal the names of the patentees. A patent assigned to a company is a company asset, one for which it has assumed the responsibility, both moneywise and workwise. The pat ent, in such cases, is not the posses sion of the inventor. It is true that knowing the name of the inventor may be of help to another scientist, just as it is true that inventors like to be recognized by having their names on patents; but the protection of the invention is the prime purpose of patent offices, and the rapid publication of scientific in formation is the prime purpose of Chemical Abstracts. Neither group was established for the purpose of building morale of inventors.
^&|| j^lll jg^Sffl
It was simple, really, once we stopped to think about it. The trouble is, we so seldom have the time to stop· But one day last week we did. And here*s what we thought ! Ugly, smuggly I Our ads can look any old way as long as we con tinue turning out the highest quality PHOS GENE-BASED CHEMICALS you can buy· And we do· So many companies prefer to leave the manufacture of PHOSGENE-BASED CHEMICALS to us. Which makes us too busy to contrive pretty advertisements· But you can break this vicious circle» Because whatever you need — Phosgene derivatives, pharmaceutical inter mediates, agricultural products, etc. — we f ve always got time to help you make money with 0ΓΤ Chemicals I
H . C. SlLBERMAN
Richmond.
Va.
D E A R SIR:
Sharing wholeheartedly Messrs. Gerson and Bachmann's view on "Pat ents without Authors," I would like to offer a constructive suggestion. Why not let ACS publish a new jour nal called Journal of Recognition? The sole objective of the journal is to "be fair to the chemists who create
OTT W Jk
A
Chemical 500 Agard Road, Muskegon, Michigan PHONE: «16 786-3011
AUG.
15, 1966 C & E N
7
new methods and products essential to our technology" and to be "a morale builder to those people who see their work go unrecognized." You need to print only the names of the authors, their pictures, and their creations, whether they are patents, publications, or products. This way, CA can con tinue abstracting and transmitting chemical information; chemists will be satisfied for being recognized for their work and knowing who are making contributions in a given field. In short, everybody is going to be happy. If you should decide to publish this journal, due recognition should be given in the first issue to Messrs. Gerson and Bachmann, but not to me, for it is they who gave me this idea. A. J. Yu Trenton, N.J.
" W E USE SURETY SURESEAL GLOVES and they are the best all-around gloves we've tried!" Surety Gloves get a workout that's as tough as they come in this major truck body manufacturer's plant. They are used in corrosive cleaning operations and for dipping wood components of the trucks in wood preservatives. This Surety booster reports that Surety Sureseals come through with flying colors, are "twice as good" as others tested. He
saves on glove costs, hand damage to workers and production costs. Let your Surety Distributor put new safety and savings in your operations.
THE SURETY RUBBER COMPANY Box 97-U-8, Carrollton, Ohio, U.S.A. Export Division: 1007 Temple Bar Building Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 In Canada: Safety Supply Company, Toronto
No milestones in learning D E A R SIR:
When an eminent Committee on Goals of Engineering Education wastes its time debating the relative merits of requiring a four- or five-year course for an engineering degree, it is time to stop talking and start thinking. We talk about the progress in science which makes all knowledge obsolete in a few years yet grant degrees which imply that the holder has learned everything to be known about every subject. Any student worth the name knows that there are no milestones in learning, no end of the journey. Every employer who is not merely filling a manning table can judge the requirements for a specific job by bet ter measures than a B.Sc, M.S., or Ph.D. So, let's abolish all degrees. Then perhaps Committees on the Goals of Education will make knowledge the goal, not degrees. GEORGE GIBSON
M ont clair, N.J.
Chemstrand in nylon DEAR SIR:
Your June 13th issue contained an article "Celanese to Make Nylon Plas tics." It includes the statement "Be tween 75 and 80% of this was nylon 6/6 made by Du Pont, the only U.S. producer." The Chemstrand Division of Monsanto began shipping produc tion quantities of nylon 6/6 plastic resin late in 1964. During the past 18 months, we have introduced and mar keted specialty grades of 6/6 plastic resin and started up a commercial fa cility for 6/10 product. R. R. MOYER
New York, Ν.Ύ. 8 C&EN AUG. 15, 1966
