論工業社會及其未來-科學家的動機

科學家的動機 

87

科學和技術提供了替代性活動中最重要的例子。有些科學家宣稱他們被「好奇心」或對於「造福人類」的渴望所激勵。但很容易看出這兩者都不是大部分科學家的主要動機。對於「好奇心」，這個概念簡直是荒謬的。大部分科學家研究高度專業化的問題，這些問題不是任何正常好奇心的對象。舉例來說， 一個天文學家、數學家或昆蟲學家會對異丙基三甲基甲烷的性質感到好奇嗎？當然不會。只有一個化學家才會對此感到好奇，且他會對此感到好奇僅僅是因為化學是他的替代性活動。化學家會對新種甲蟲的適當分類感到好奇嗎？不會。這個問題只有昆蟲學家感興趣，且他會對此感到好奇僅僅是因為昆蟲學是他的替代性活動。如果化學家和昆蟲學家必須要竭盡所能努力以獲得生活必需品，且如果這樣的努力以某種非科學追求有趣地運用他們的能力，那麼他們就根本不會在乎異丙基三甲基甲烷或甲蟲的分類。 假設缺乏研究生教育資金導致化學家成為保險經紀人而不是化學家。 在這種情況下他會對保險事務感興趣而對異丙基三甲基甲烷毫不在乎。無論如何，科學家僅僅為了滿足好奇心而投入如此的時間和努力在工作中是不正常的。 以「好奇心」來解釋科學家的動機是站不住腳的。

◈ 

THE MOTIVES OF SCIENTISTS

87

Science and technology provide the most important examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by "curiosity" or by a desire to "benefit humanity." But it is easy to see that neither of these can be the principal motive of most scientists. As for "curiosity," that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work on highly specialized problems that are not the object of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit, then they wouldn't give a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that scientists put into their work. The "curiosity" explanation for the scientists' motive just doesn't stand up.