OUR YOUNG SCIENTISTS
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
sw,—With some eight years' experience as a chemist in smaller industrial firms, I feel able to endorse many of the views of "Young Chemist" on the attitude of young scientists in industry. A university course in the natural sciences involves a systematic training in the search for objective truth and accuracy, and three or four years of such training is bound to have a considerable influence on a student who takes his subject seriously. Thus the nature of his studies predisposes the young graduate towards idealism and towards a desire to serve science regardless of other considerations.
In a practical world, of course, this idealistic frame of mind may have to be modified, but I feel that the disillusionment which the graduate often undergoes on ennring industry is frequently much greater than he deserves. As "Young Chemist" implies, I fear that it is all too true that the general outlook and standard of honesty of business men where scientific work is concerned leaves much to be desired. Like him, I have seen the abilities of graduates wasted in efforts to analyse the products of competitors for the purpose of imitating them as closely as possible. I have known many cases where unfavourable data are omitted from laboratory reports in order to give a falsely favourable impression of the article in question. In small firms particularly it is not uncommon for the management to be afraid to act on information from the laboratory owing to its unfamiliarity, or to be hampered by lack of scientific training from making proper use of such information.
"Young Chemist" does not touch on what is, to my mind, an important aspect of an industrial scientist's position in industry, 'namely, the secrecy which veils most of his work. This secrecy has two effects. The scientist is unable to satisfy his natural desire to communicate his results to his fellows in the form ot scientific papers, and in the smaller firms he is denied the stimulus of discussing his results with others (for he may frequently be the only qualified scientist in the firm). I speak from experience in saying that a most discouraging feeling of isolation can arise from these causes.
It is, of course, natural that the business man, trained merely as such, should regard the idea of publication with hostility. He is not usually aware that the best scientific tradition is one of mutual co-operation and exchange of results between scientists working on similar problems. The fact is that the business mentality of working for oneself and of com- peting with others of similar interests is diametrically opposed to the best scientific tradition of sharing results for the mutual object of obtain- ing further knowledge, and this difficulty seems to be shirked by those who at the present time call for more and yet more research. In my opinion, a great deal of our national asset of scientific ability is being wasted through duplication of work consequent on too much secrecy in industry.
How can this situation be remedied? Like "Young Chemist," I feel that the directorates of all manufacturing businesses must contain univer- sity graduates with power equal to that of their commercial colleagues, and with a sense of responsibility which will ensure the utilisation of scientific data according to national rather thab individual requirements. Research in smaller firms =lit be discouraged. for it tends to be hampered by lack of resources, and it is inherently difficult for small units to allow publication of scientific data.
And, finally, industrialists themselves must realise that too much individualism, too much competition in industry, isolates the scientist from his fellows and spells frustration for him.—Yours faithfully,
Previous page
