Centre for the Philosophy of Natural and Social Science Contingency and Dissent in

The term “basic research” is ubiquitous in present debates on policy in science and higher education. It is a term with positive connotations, important for example in legitimising traditional universities. The popular term “research” generally corresponds to “research and development” (R&D) in official statistics. This includes “applied research” and “technological development” as well as “basic research.” In public discourse these distinctions are regularly overlooked. “Research” simply includes” the whole of R&D. The public neglect of the differences corresponds to a trend in science studies. Within present historical, philosophical, sociological, economic, etc. studies of science and technology there is a strong tendency to play down the difference between applied and basic research, or between science and technology, or explicitly to reject it as relevant to the politics or governance of science. This paper argues that more respect for these differences would improve the chances of developing a politics of science to serve society as a whole and not only the special interests of certain groups, be they private enterprises, political movements, particular religions, the scientific community, or others. Introduction This paper aims to recover and demonstrate the present relevance of an understanding of basic science that was still widely taken for granted half a century ago. It was then often called “pure science” or simply “science.” On this view truthfulness is the root value and scientific research is perceived as a search for truth that ought to be as free as possible from the