349 



Traditionally, cooperation in solving scientific problems has always 

 appeared immeasurably less complex than cooperation in solving 

 political problems. As pointed out by Astin, since — 



. . . science is concerned with external phenomena which are usually measure- 

 able and whose manifestations are demonstrable and repeatable, there is less 

 cause for disagreement, for controversy, than there is ... in politics .... 

 Furthermore, the preoccupations of . . . scientists are usually less charged with 

 emotion than are those of . . . politician [s] .... The consideration of po- 

 litical . . . plans or policies tends to arouse . . . passions, whereas delibera- 

 tions [on scientific matters] tend to proceed more calmly. 204 



Thus scientists tend to have fewer social problems since their research 

 is generally focused upon common, well-defined objectives offering 

 "a natural point of convergence, namely, the correct result." 205 

 Unlike politicians, they are not engaged in conflict resolution as a 

 profession and are not charged with responsibility for the protection 

 of national interests in a competitive arena. Rather, the existence of a 

 common, agreed-upon technical objective creates a tendency toward 

 social cooperation despite all obstacles, a tendency which has become a 

 characteristic of the international scientific community. 206 Scientists 

 tend inherently to recognize the interdependence of their efforts 

 and accept that interdependence as one of the basic conditions of the 

 environment in which they work. It is then relatively easy for them 

 to accept the extension of this principle to the environment in which 

 they live. 



Despite these inherent advantages scientists possess over their politi- 

 cal brethren, some pitfalls persist. It is possible "to interject political 

 considerations into scientific and technical discussions so that a con- 

 sensus of opinion can deliberately be prevented from emerging into a 

 group decision." 207 This appears to have occurred during the IGY 

 when the Soviets made agreement impossible on what kinds of 

 launch and telemetering data would be provided to all participants. 208 

 In general, however, such behavior tends to be minimized among 

 scientists because of their overriding concern for success of the project 

 itself. Scientists appear unusually skilled in finding "common de- 

 nominators which enable them to cooperate in attaining generally 

 desired objectives." 209 



In view of the substantial differences between the scientific and 

 political communities in the kinds of problems they are respectively 

 called upon to solve, prudence would suggest caution in looking for 

 too bold a transfer of techniques from one community to another. 

 The IGY itself was apolitical and closed-ended, whereas the political 

 process is, a priori, political and open-ended. 210 Yet, politicians and 

 scientists do share some important human characteristics. Politicians 

 and governments, no less than scientists and scientific organizations, 

 are capable of and motivated toward uniting to achieve common 

 objectives. A major difficulty is that the procedures for finding 

 solutions to problems facing politicians and governments are less 

 clearly defined than are the procedures for finding solutions to the 

 specific types of problems commonly faced by scientists and engineers. 



JM Astin, "The Scientific Community," p. 32. 



205 Senate Document No. 56, International Cooperation and Organization, p. 208. 

 J » Astin, "The Scientific Community," p. 32. 



107 Senate Document No. 56, International Cooperation and Organization, p. 209. 



508 Discussed in detail in: Arnold W. Frutkin, International Cooperation in Space (Englewood Cliffs: 

 Prentice Hall, 1965). 



206 Senate Document No. 56, International Cooperation and Organization, p. 209. 



S1 ° Comment by Murray Todd, executive director, Office of the Foreign Secretary, National Academy of 

 8ciences. 



