‘The National Science Foundation and the Debate over Postwar Research Policy, 1942-1945: A Political Interpretation of Science~The Endless Frontier Daniel J. Kevles Isis, Vol. 68, No. 1 (Mar., 1977), 4-26. Stable URL: fip:flinks jstor-org/sici sici=O021-753928197703%2968%3A | 3C4%9ATNSFAT%3E2.0.COWIB22 ‘Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at fp (fw. stor orglaboutitermshrnl. ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless You. have obtained prior permission, you ray not download an entire issue of &joumal or multiple copies of aricies, and You may use content in the ISTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the sereen or printed page of such transmission, Asis is published by The University of Chicago Ptess. Please contact the publisher for further permissions regarding the use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at huipi/Avww. tor org/joumals/uepress. ht. is ©1977 The History of Science Society ISTOR and the ISTOR logo are trademarks of ISTOR, and are Registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. For mote information on ISTOR contact jstor-inio@umich edu, ©2003 IsTOR up:therww stor orgy ‘Tue Sep 9.07:15:06 2003The National Science Foundation and the Debate over Postwar Research Policy, 1942-1945 A Political Interpretation of Science—The Endless Frontier By Daniel J. Kevles* "0 DATE, the origins of Science—The Endlass Frontier, the celebrated report issued in’ 1945 by Vannevar Bush and subsequently so influential in the shaping of the National Science Foundation, remain. obscure behind the veil of memory. Bush, the director of the wartime Office of Scientifie Research and Development (QSRD), later attributed the conception of the report to a casual conversation with President Frankia D. Roosevelt, who asked for i when Bush remarked that science might well languish in the postwar United States. More recently, Oscar M. Rucbhiausen, the general counsel of OSRD from 1944 to 1946, has attributed the initiative for the report to Oscar S. Cox, an influential government lawyer, who wanted the administrative tech- niques pioneered by OSRD for defense research adapted to a peacetime program.' Though Ruebhausen’s quarter-century-old recollections are closer tothe truth, neither account squares with the contemporary documentary record. More important, both ignore that the report was written in a highly political context which was generated by a growing debate over a major policy issize—the issue of how the federal government should advance science for the general welfare in peacetime.* ‘The debate began early in the war and originated in a cluster of concerns among Americans of a liberal political persuasion about the extent to which defense research was dominated by big business in alliance with the leading Universities. Vociferous complaints had cropped up charging unfair evaluation, Received Novernber 1975; revised /avcepted August 1975, SDivsion of Humanities and Soria Sciences, Calforois Instiute of Technology, Pasadena, Calfornm 91108 "WA Visi wich Vannevar Bush,” Mouic, 1970, 1:10; Mikon Lomas, leer, Seinze, Oct. 12, ays, 182.116. 21 wish co achnovledige che aid af P "Thomas Carell, Jr, whose senir thesis at Caltech conscibuted to the early exploracon of this subject The reseacch for this paper was dave in pare wih the Suppor af the Ametican Couneilof Leamed Sacienes and the Narwool Science Foundation (grant No. GS-30675, (sis, 1877, 68 (No. 261) 5President Truman congratulating ten key scientists for thelt work in the wartime Office of Scientific Researen and Develapment, January 20 (18467), Left ta right, seated: Jamies. B. Conant, president, Harvard University; Truman, and Alfred N. Rivbards, chairman, Commitios fon Medical Research of OSRD. Standing’ Kar! 7. Comptan, président, Massachusetts Insitute ff Teennalogy: Lewis H. Weed, National Academy of Seiances; Vannevar Bush, director, OSKO: Frank B. Jowor, New York City; J. C. Hunsaker, MLLT.; Roger Adams, University of Wino, A. Baird Hastings, Harvard; A. A. Dacher, Columbia University. (From the Vannevar Bush Papers, Manuscript Division, Ubeary of Congress