Abstract
IN the leading article in NATURE of August 7, reference is made to my paper “The Autonomy of Science” 1, and the comment is made: “it is, to say the least, unfortunate that he should impute to the type of planning and organization of scientific effort and resources urged by Sir Stafford Cripps an attempt to interfere with the internal discipline of science and the decisions leading to discovery”. My paper was printed before Sir Stafford Cripps made his statement of policy. It contains no criticism—much less a rejection—of such policies, which follow the lines established throughout the world, including Great Britain, for at least a generation. Sir Stafford's plans seem in fact entirely admirable to me.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Mem. Proc. Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc., 85, 19–38.
"Planning of Science" Association of Scientific Workers, p. 110 (London, 1943).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
POLANYI, M. Research and Planning. Nature 152, 217–218 (1943). https://doi.org/10.1038/152217c0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/152217c0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.