I don't think it would be a good idea for scientists to have more political power. Scientists as a group are more inclined to try to derive an ought from an is, than the population at large.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There is need for more science in politics and less politics in science.
Scientists are being portrayed by much of the power structure in politics and business as having a vested interest - that they're just out to get more grant money by exaggerating the threats.
Elections, for their part, are typically popularity contests rather than measures of candidates' relative competency or effectiveness. Imagine if scientific truth were determined according to which scientist was most popular. To be successful, scientists would have to be charismatic and attractive - and human knowledge would suffer terribly.
Many science people feel groups like WHO are there to do a job and not to be dealt with in a political way.
I believe that politics takes a much different set of skills than science. Science is about getting to the truth. Politics is about what people think and how they react.
No science is immune to the infection of politics and the corruption of power.
Science has become politicized, and that's an embarrassment.
Political ideology can corrupt the mind, and science.
My title is intended to suggest that the community of scientists is organized in a way which resembles certain features of a body politic and works according to economic principles similar to those by which the production of material goods is regulated.
Science shouldn't be just for scientists, and there are encouraging signs that it is becoming more pervasive in culture and the media.
No opposing quotes found.