Part I of this 2-part series presented the origins, characteristics, and benefits of the several new megaprizes for outstanding scientific research (see “New Multimillion Megaprizes for Science, Part I” at: http://dr-monsrs.net/2014/11/20/new-megaprizes-for-science-part-i/ ). Part II now examines and discusses several unintended effects that these programs are likely to produce, all of which will hurt science, research, and scientists.
What will be the Effects of the New Giant Cash Prizes on Science and Scientists?
Nobody anticipated that new rewards for outstanding scientific research would arise with cash rewards of several million dollars to each honoree, but this now is history! In addition to the several good features of the new award programs by the Breakthrough Prize and the Tang Prize for Biopharmaceutical Science, several major unintended consequences of instituting these multimillion megaprizes will arise.
The first negative effect is to set off an ongoing competition to establish additional new awards having even larger cash prizes. This is caused by a mentality that mistakenly regards the very largest pot of gold as being the most significant way to honor the very best scientists.
A second negative effect will be to induce some university scientists to shift their ongoing career from trying to make important discoveries through experimental research into working to get rich by winning one or more science megaprizes. The traditional idealism in scientists then goes out the window! These effects move along nicely to solidify the increasing commercialization and rising significance of money in modern university science (see “Money Now is Everything in Scientific Research at Universities” ). I already have presented my view that such a financial situation has very destructive consequences for science and research (see essays on “Introduction to Money in Modern Scientific Research” and “What is the Very Biggest Problem for Science Today?” ).
A third negative effect involves public perceptions of science. Since some of the new megaprizes are presented at an ostentatious extravaganza, the whole spectrum of public opinions is encouraged to shift from having interest and curiosity for research and technology, to viewing science as an entertainment and research as an amusement. That will merge with the very common mistaken belief that science has no real importance for daily life (see essay “On the Public Disregard for Science and Research” ). Scientists then will become part of the entertainment industry, and will be competing for public attention and acclaim with professional athletes, movie stars, opera singers, rock musicians, political celebrities, new billionaires, etc. The directors of the new megaprizes evidently do not see the inherent contradiction between trying to increase public appreciation for scientific research, and putting the award ceremonies on global display as some new sort of Hollywood amusement. Substituting movie stars for royalty just does not do the job!
These misguided features will change the very nature of a research career, solidify the conversion of university science into a business activity, and encourage the public to view science as some kind of nonsense. These unintended effects will be strongly negative and destructive for science and research, as I have already explained (see my essay on “Could Science and Research Now be Dying?” ).
Some Predicted Bizarre Developments have Become Past History!
When I first composed this essay, I wrote that this whole new scenario could later become equivalent to the Academy Award ceremonies in the movie industry. I now read that the 2014/2015 Breakthrough megaprizes just had an Oscar-style private gala for the presentation of its awards by popular celebrities [e.g., 1-3]; my first prediction has happened already! It seems likely that some new science megaprize soon might replace the traditional medal given to the winners of a Nobel  or Kavli  Prize with a special very expensive artwork; that could be a bronze bust or an engraved portrait, to be permanently displayed in some science museum. Further escalation could include an additional part in the award ceremonies featuring a bejewelled crown bestowed onto the head of each winner while they are seated on a throne with lots of flashing lights. Any of this is ridiculous and inappropriate, sends the wrong message, and demeans science, research, and scientists!
My Suggestions for a New Direction in Science Megaprizes
The money problem that most university scientists worry about is not the size of their bank account. Rather, it is the size and continuation of their research grant support. The new megaprizes do not directly address this very prominent feature of modern science (see “What is the New Main Job of Faculty Scientists Today?” and “Introduction to Money in Modern Scientific Research” ). It is possible, and even likely, that winners of these megaprizes will spend some portion of their large financial reward to support their own research efforts; that might be used to either supplement their current research grant funds, or to start a new research project that they always wanted to work on, but could not get funded. My suggestion here is that additional new megaprize programs should directly reward both the personal activities and the science ambitions of the most outstanding research scientists; the new Tang Ptize in Biopharmaceutical Science does exactly that .
Why not go even farther? If some new science prize would offer 3-5 million dollars to be spent exclusively for unrestricted research expenses over an 8-10 year period, then that would be truly meaningful! Not only would any university scientist be extremely overjoyed and utterly excited to receive that amazing reward, but it also would strongly encourage the progress of science.
Concluding Remarks for Parts I and II
Some features of the multimillion megaprizes for excellence in science certainly are good, but it remains to be seen if these new programs can consistently result in honoring research achievements to the same high level as do the Nobel and Kavli Prizes [4,5]. Their other features seem to me to be very likely to cause further decay and degeneration in science and research.
New entries in the unannounced contest to be the very biggest prize for science all base their claim on the amount of cash offered as a financial reward. This loud emphasis on dollars is inconsistent with what scientific research is all about. Any new programs with the bigger or biggest pile of money cheapen science, change the nature of university research in undesirable ways, and, present a false view of science to the public (i.e., it is some kind of Hollywood entertainment). The wonderful article by Merali  presents the candid opinions of several other scientists having similar misgivings to my own about unintended negative effects of the new multimillion megaprizes on science (see: http://nature.com/news/science-prizes-Are-new-nobels-1.13168 ).
 Merali, Z., 2013. Science prizes: The new Nobels. Nature 498:152-154. Available on the internet at: http://nature.com/news/science-prizes-Are-new-nobels-1.13168.
 Sample, I., The Guardian, 2012. Biggest science prize takes web tycoon from social networks to string theory. Available on the internet at: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jul/31/prize-science-yuri-milner-awards .
 BBC News, Science and Environment, 2014. ‘Biggest prize in science’ awarded. Available on the internet at: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29987154 .
 Nobel Prizes, 2014. Nobel Prize facts. Available on the internet at: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/facts/ .
 The Kavli Prize, 2014. About the Kavli Prize. Available on the internet at: http://www.kavliprize.org/about/ .
]6] Tang Prize Foundation, 2014. Introduction, award categories, and 2014 Tang Prize in biopharmaceutical science. Available on the internet at: http://www.tang-prize.org/ENG/Publish.aspx .
GO BACK TO HOME PAGE OR SCROLL UP TO MENU
UNDER THE WEBSITE TITLE