Discussion on Timmer, Stern, Tims and Sankar
In some few areas of study--particle physics, for example--it has proved fruitful for scientists to adopt the stance that the mapping from concepts to reality should be exact and complete. A "theory" is seen as a detailed blueprint of phenomena. Any lack of correspondence between concept and data is an anomaly, warranting serious research. At the other end of the spectrum, in engineering, meteorology, and most social sciences, the conceptual system of a science is but a simplified model or even just a crude sketch. Such formulations capture some of the features of the world and not others; they function primarily as heuristic and didactic devices to aid specific investigations of a statistical or case-study sort. Of course much variety is possible in the adequacy even of crude models. When concepts are stylized and inaccurate, the ability to explain/predict/control real events requires a large component of nonconceptualized "tacit" knowledge, as Polanyi has argued. While we cannot fully formulate and write down what we know by means of such "skills" or "insights," such knowledge can be reliable and perfectable; in fact, it comprises much of what we know about the world. The distinction between science and craft is thus a matter
The Relative Bargaining Strengths of the Developing Countries
"A particular aspect of economic stability to which special attention must be given is the stabilization of world raw material prices .... The unfortunate consequences of large fluctuations in these prices have been particularly evident in the past few years. ... While the need for avoiding excessive fluctuations will be readily recognized, there is no easy solution that is equally applicable to all commodities" (Organization for European Economic Cooperation, pp. 26-27). This description of the commodity problem could have been written in 1974, but in fact it was written more than two decades ago. The lack of progress since then in dealing with commodity prices-both to reduce the amplitude of fluctuations and to maintain or increase their prices relative to those of manufactured goods-has been a frequent source of friction between the industrialized and the developing countries. Efforts to manage commodity prices through international cooperation have not been lacking but, in general, these have not been very successful. The world economic situation and the actions of groups of commodity-producing countries have heightened the awareness of raw material producers and consumers alike to the possibilities of supply management. Speculation about the chances for success of such actions obviously must be larded liberally with humility derived from the knowledge that a mere three years ago it was held with certitude that a collective effort to raise oil prices was impossible. Nonetheless, it is worthwhile to set out the interrelationships bearing on the access to, and the prices of, primary commodities so that there will be a framework for discussion of alternative scenarios. The unilateral increase of oil prices, the general commodity price boom of 1972-74, and the concern with the possible depletion of the world's resources is sometimes seen as the beginning of a major shift in power relationships between the industrialized and developing countries. Fred Bergsten called attention to the interaction of these factors as early as the summer of 1973 and recently has expanded on this theme.
The New ‘U’
Today's talk about tenure must be framed within broader discussions about the role of the university. Our university system is now over one hundred years old, the “Old-Time College” is gone, the “cold war” university is no longer viable, and the foundations of the modern “multiversity” are cracking, so it is time to talk about change. But change is not necessarily reform, and resisting change probably will not keep things the way they are, so academics must understand the forces reshaping the university. Whenever I listen to colleagues defend the status quo by saying that the United States has a university system that is the envy of the world, I hear echoes of the Detroit automobile industry's casual dismissal of foreign competitors in the early 1960s. The decision not to change did not preserve the auto industry, and it is unlikely to preserve public universities as we know them. The current debates about tenure began with ideological attacks on “tenured radicals” who used their secure jobs to subvert conservative cultural values. The attack on tenure gathered steam as fiscal hawks in financially-strapped states looked for ways to save money and found huge state university systems with budgets to match. When asked why he robbed banks, the legendary Willie Sutton replied, “Because that's where the money is.” When asked why they are robbing tenure, legislators, regents, and administrators reply, “Because that's where the money is.” Personnel costs are a large share of university budgets and tenure ties the hands of administrators and legislators accustomed to using purse strings to control universities.