The pursuit of, and interest in, science

Re “The life science imperative,” Opinion, Jan. 29

Although I agree with Lawrence H. Summers’ argument, if we’re honest with ourselves, we also have to factor into our lead in science and technology in the 20th century that Europe’s and Japan’s capacities were largely bombed out of existence during World War II.

The United States was not a leading place for science before the war. We also have to thank Hitler for unintentionally sending all those first-rate Jewish scientists over here. Happily, we seem to be in a world in which scientific progress is no longer determined by what happens in any one country. Of course, just as in business, someone wanting to pursue science has to look at the world as his or her place of potential employment.

FRED G. MILLER

Poughkeepsie, N.Y.

*

Summers writes, “Most important, we must respect the scientific method”; then he blames “intelligent design” as one of the roadblocks. Daily, polls and papers tell us kids today and people the world over instinctively know there is more to life, including a spiritual element. The old idea of a purely naturalistic science of unguided chance and mutation is shallow and can’t compete.

Why doesn’t Summers help get the philosophy out of science and encourage the teaching of real day-to-day working science that professional scientists actually use? When it’s demonstrated that there’s good business in it, science will again attract the kids and the people, and the funds will be right behind.

RICHARD BOUFFORD

Newport Beach