I’m fascinated by the idea that narratives can become embedded in a nation’s psyche and, even if incorrect, shape its culture and politics. This week I came across
this fascinating essay from 1996 by historian David Edgerton (Thanks Rowland Manthorpe for the link). Edgerton says the idea of the UK as a declining scientific and technological power is “part of the very fabric of British intellectual life”. He also argues it’s mistaken: any decline was relative and the result of the rest of the world
catching up, not policy failure
Rowland
says belief in “techno-declinism” explains the current UK Government’s desire to make Britain the global capital of science and technology. As
we’ve discussed before, Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister’s senior advisor, is a major proponent of this agenda, the first fruit of which is the creation of a UK ARPA (which I wrote about for Wired
here). Edgerton’s essay suggests this is a policy mistake. He criticises the assumption that "more scientific and technical education, and more investment in R&D, are the main causes of economic growth”
But there are at least three reasons to support the creation of ARPA-like institutions and higher R&D spend, even if the impact on growth is limited. The first is geopolitical. There are some technologies where having a national capability is of vital strategic importance. Second,
as we noted in the context of the Apollo Missions, science represents an opportunity to create a shared sense of purpose. Third, and most importantly, as we discussed
a few weeks ago sometimes technology creates new possibilities for what it means to be human. That’s worth having, even if it does nothing for GDP.