The Market Logic and the American Research Bubbles
Wang Xueqian1,2, Cai Zhong1,2
1. Department of Philosophy,Nanjing University,Nanjing 210023,China; 2. Center for Contemporary Philosophy of Intelligence and the Future of Humanity,Nanjing University,Nanjing 210023,China
Abstract：The scientific research is an undertaking that requires large-scale investment.While achieving corresponding achievements,it is possible to produce a phenomenon similar to an economic bubble in some parts.During the Cold War,the US government's irrational investment in the field of physics created the bubble of scientific research.The new scientific model attempts to use the market mechanisms to optimize the allocation of scientific research resources to avoidthe physics bubble.However,the market logic failed to cope with the scientific research bubble.Instead,it shifted the physics bubble to a new field with promising market prospects,which are manifested as the research results with low statistical efficiency,the lack of practical significance in application,the increase in the number of patents but the degradation in quality,etc.The reason for the formation of the bubble is traced to the fact that market logic replaces scientific logic,when a large amount of venture capital flows into the scientific research field,it will appear:exaggerated propaganda strategies,unhealthy decision-making orientation,and selection strategies to replace scientific exploration.At the same time,science can not be “instant falsification”and social psychological effects,making the bubble difficult to be identified in the short term,which leads to a new round of more severe scientific research bubbles,resulting in the unfulfilled promises of “scientific research”,followed by a crisis of investor confidence and a loss of public trust in science.
[1]PEDERSEN D B,HENDRICKS V F.Science bubbles[J].Philosophy & technology,2014,27 (4):503-518. [2]MIROWSKI P.The modern commercialization of science is a passel of Ponzi schemes[J].Social epistemology,2012,26 (3-4):285-310. [3]GIUDICE G F.Big science and the large hadron collider[J].Physics in perspective,2012,14 (1):95-112. [4]诺德曼.科学的转型——有关 “时代断裂”的争论[M].武天欣,蔡仲,译.南京:南京大学出版社,2021. [5]LAVE R,MIROWSKI P,RANDALLS S.Introduction:STS and neoliberal science[J].Social studies of science,2010,40 (5):659-675. [6] MIROWSKI P,SENT E M.The commercialization of science and the response of STS[M]//HACKETT E J,AMSTERDAMSKA O,LYNCH M,et al.The handbook of science and technology studies.Cambridge:MIT Press,2008:635-689. [7]李玲娟,蒋能倬,张波.美国技术转移政策的要点及借鉴[J].科技导报,2020,38 (24):53-61. [8] FELLER I.Neoliberalism,performance measurement,and the governance of American academic science[J].Center for studies in higher education,2008 (10):1-20. [9]聂翠蓉.10 年48 亿,生物医学创新全面启动[N].科技日报,2016-12-01 (2). [10] EVANS J P,MESLIN E M,MARTEAU T M,et al.Deflating the genomic bubble[J].Science,2011,331 (6019):861-862. [11]方晋.美国真正的危机是技术进步放慢[EB/OL]. (2020-11-19)[2020-12-28].https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1683780713083892456&wfr=spider&for=pc. [12] 王学谦,蔡仲.市场导向下的科研监管困境[J].科学与社会,2021,11 (3):61-72. [13]赵玉林,刘超,谷军健.研发投入结构对高质量创新的影响——兼论有为政府和有效市场的协同效应[J].中国科技论坛,2021 (1):55-64. [14] 王学谦,蔡仲.新自由主义与科学之间的张力[J].科学与社会,2020,10 (4):45-59. [15]布尔迪厄.科学之科学与反观性[M].陈圣生,译.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2006. [16] 陆敏,周琳.防止资本无序扩张[N].经济日报,2020-12-27 (3).
2022, 
