Basic Research

Curiosity is the hallmark of human mental activity. Since the Greeks, it has been thought that a fundamental human impulse is to know the causes of things. This passion for knowledge has produced not only knowledge but also the foundations for vast improvements in our daily lives (Kornberg, 1997).

Basic research is driven by curiosity about the way the world works. We know that sooner or later, the new knowledge will have practical beneficial consequences, sometimes astounding ones. But these cannot [Page 53]be foreseen, and, indeed, may coyly hide if searched for directly. The historical record makes abundantly clear that curiosity is the heartbeat of discovery and invention. Scientists engaged in basic research do not think about these things, except when called on to justify themselves; they are simply in thrall to their curiosities. But for those engaged in building the infrastructure of science or stocking the research portfolio, who often may be overpowered by concern for eradicating ills, the lessons about basic research are imperative (Kornberg, 1997).

Basic research can be characterized in several ways. Some note its tendency to be innovative and risk taking. But at the bottom line, basic research is simply research whose purpose is to know the way some phenomenon or process works. Of course, phenomena and processes differ in the number and variety of domains they touch. For example, a high point in human understanding of physical nature was the realization that the same basic processes govern both earthly and celestial phenomena.

Thus, although curiosity drives all basic research, and all basic research seeks to understand the way something works, the more basic the process, the more basic the research. The Holy Grail is always discovery of the ultimate forces. Along the road, we lavish the utmost care and devotion on processes that, however ubiquitous or however long their reach, are not really ultimate forces. In so doing, we learn something about the way the world works, and we sharpen scientific tools in preparation for the more basic processes yet to be discerned.

Following Newton's (1686/1952) ideas for understanding physical nature, observed behavioral and social phenomena are usefully viewed as the product of the joint operation of several basic forces. Put differently, the sociobehavioral world is a multifactor world, a view that lies at the heart of both theoretical and empirical work (e.g., Parsons, 1968). The scientific challenges are two—one theoretical, the other empirical. The theoretical challenge is to identify the basic forces governing human behavior, describe their operation, and derive their implications. The empirical challenge is to test the derived implications. The theoretical and empirical work jointly lead to the accumulation of reliable knowledge about human behavioral and social phenomena.

Even the briefest consideration of basic research would not be complete without at least some speculation on the identity of the basic forces governing behavioral and social phenomena. Fermi used to spend an hour a day on pure speculation about the nature of the physical world (Segrè, 1970). In that spirit, an initial list of candidates for basic forces might include the four discussed in Jasso (2001, pp.

...