Research and support for it

 Edward O. Wilson was lucky. Institutions with money supported his research. He got to study the questions that fascinated him.

The questions about support seem secondary to me. The important thing was that Wilson found his interests — he found the questions that absorbed him when he was a teenager.

Wilson, backed by Harvard University, studied ants in Mexico and the South Pacific. That kind of travel was possible only because of generous funding. The travel was essential to the work that Wilson wanted to do. But other scientists and naturalists have done interesting work while staying at home. The Rev. Gilbert White, author of The Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne, is an example of what a naturalist can do without a research budget.

Without Harvard’s support, Wilson would have had to settle for less. But I think he would have done interesting work if his scientific expeditions had been walks through the neighborhood.

Incidentally, while Wilson needed money for travel, his budget for scientific equipment was modest. He used a hand lens and collecting jars. Scientists in elementary school might be familiar with the gear.

I am no educational reformer. But if I have an ambition for our public schools, it would be that they were  focused on helping each student to find his or her interests.

The question of support for research and researchers is important. I live a few miles from the headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The word “disrupted” doesn’t cover what’s happened to the research and researchers.

Questions about who gets what in terms of public support often have nothing to do with fairness or the importance of the work.

If I were young again, I would want to find the questions that interested me. Then I’d take my chances, with or without support.

• Source: Edward O. Wilson, Naturalist; Washington, D.C.: Island Press/Shearwater Books, 1994.