EDITORIAL
How Much for Space? The consumption of ingenuity is a critical factor
C
ontroversy over the space program is flaring to a new high. Arguments within the Congress and between the legislative and executive branches of the Government are vigorous. Recently, eight scientists, including Nobel laureate chemists Willard F. Libby and Harold C. Urey, issued a joint statement defending the program to send a man—not just instruments—to the moon. They presented the view that the heart of these plans is not merely the study of space, it is man in space. The element of the space program most decried seems to be the immense financial cost. In defense, arguments have been advanced that the program is making great contributions to scientific knowledge. Other arguments favoring the program have contended that spillover effects on consumer-oriented technology will yield great dividends. The eight scientists in their statement, however, take a different approach. They declared that the support given the enlarged space program by the people and the Congress was based not entirely on scientific grounds, but also on the conviction that this program will make important contributions to the future welfare and security of the United States. There is strong reason to believe that putting the first man on the moon can be a very important factor in world prestige and power politics; it must be admitted that the primary goal probably is not predominantly scientific. But achievement of the goal nevertheless requires scientists and technologists in large numbers. We must face the fact that with science and
technology reaching a position of such great importance in the power struggle, some of the efforts of scientists and technologists will perforce be directed to objectives which in the purely scientific world might not be worthwhile. If we are to accept that view we must measure the resources that can be devoted to these efforts in a way that has not been customary in scientific pursuits. What percentage of our scientific and engineering talent can we devote to a given effort? We are committed to a power struggle. Perhaps the space contest is better considered as a part of the cold war. Then we must decide what part of our technical troops can be devoted to each front. Appropriations in money and material resources are argued at great length. But more critical is the consumption of our resources of ingenuity in the space effort as compared to those devoted to health, education, the basic advancement of science, and the general economy. If we slip to second place in an all-out battle to maintain what we believe is the way of life preferable to that offered by the Communists, we will be in a poor position to work at health, education, science, and the general economy, as we see it. Perhaps we can win at both if we balance the effort. Do we know?
JUNE
3, 1963
C&EN
7
