The idea that the public, as well as the government and industry, should have scientific advisors is an old one. The idea that the interests of the public should have lawyers to defend them is old too, yet it was not until the 1960's that a renewed public understanding of the insensitivity of governmental and industrial bureaucracies led to a substantial commitment in the legal profession to public‐interest law. It appears that the scientific community may now have reached a similar point; a growing awareness of the dangers of leaving the exploitation of technology to special industrial and governmental interests has led to an increased readiness among scientists to undertake work in public‐interest science.
REFERENCES
1.
J. Primack, F. von Hippel, Advice and Dissent: Scientists in the Political Arena, Basic Books, N.Y. (Oct. 1974).
2.
See Federal Advisory Committees, US Govt. Ptg. Office, Washington D.C. (1973)
and (for committees of the National Research Council and of the National Academies of Science and Engineering) Organization and Members, NAS‐NAE‐NRC, Washington D.C. (annual).
3.
4.
5.
In Whistle Blowing (R. Nader, P. Petkas, K. Blackwell, eds.) Grossman, New York (1972); page 4.
6.
W. O. Hagstrom, The Scientific Community, Basic Books, New York (1965).
7.
8.
9.
Copies of the conference report are available from Peter Gibbs, Chairman, Department of Physics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112.
10.
Quoted in reference 5, pages 260–1.
11.
This content is only available via PDF.
© 1974 American Institute of Physics.
1974
American Institute of Physics
You do not currently have access to this content.
