It is unanimously accepted that politics is a game of power, a game of interests. And those who come to power try to freeze the minds of as many individuals as possible to manipulate their minds and keep the power. Unfortunately, a large part of human beings still prefer to absolutely believe in something rather than thinking, asking questions and looking for answers. If management science is to be used in the governance of countries, the brains manipulation would no longer be successful. Those who lead on scientific principles would be quickly removed by those who have the talent of mass manipulation for their own interest. This is due to the tribal nature of the human being, therefore dogmas are proving to be stronger in the governance processes of any kind. Scientific research and higher education can further develop management sciences, but science is for open-minded fellows while many individuals insist on absolute beliefs (dogmas) and this is exploited by the current and future politicians.

Science, technology, and innovation have become part of everyday life. However, there are instances where they encourage the use and abuse of natural resources. So, how might science, technology, and innovation be harnessed for people, planet, and profit to deliver sustainable methods and minimize environmental harm? How might business lend a hand? See:

• Presentation Challenge: Science, Technology, and Innovation and the Tripl...

It is unanimously accepted that politics is a game of power, a game of interests. And those who come to power try to freeze the minds of as many individuals as possible to manipulate their minds and keep the power. Unfortunately, a large part of human beings still prefer to absolutely believe in something rather than thinking, asking questions and looking for answers. If management science is to be used in the governance of countries, the brains manipulation would no longer be successful. Those who lead on scientific principles would be quickly removed by those who have the talent of mass manipulation for their own interest. This is due to the tribal nature of the human being, therefore dogmas are proving to be stronger in the governance processes of any kind. Scientific research and higher education can further develop management sciences, but science is for open-minded fellows while many individuals insist on absolute beliefs (dogmas) and this is exploited by the current and future politicians.

Politics began a lot earlier than 2,500 y ago

Human beings are supposed to make rational decisions based on management science, but in fact most people, especially government people who make decisions, are NOT rational beings.

It was demonstrated by Richard Thaler who received the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2017 for integrating economics with psychology. He incorporated psychologically realistic assumptions into analyses of economic decision-making. By exploring the consequences of limited rationality, social preferences, and lack of self-control, he has shown how these human traits systematically affect individual decisions as well as market outcomes. He demonstrated how people are focusing on the narrow impact of each individual decision rather than on its overall effect required to rationally govern the countries.

As Mr. Levin indicated science is, indeed, a far-newer addition to societies regarding especially governance even as a corollary influence/function and may be the result of growth of conscience (see Jaynes, The Origin Of Consciousness In the Breakdown Of the Bicameral Mind for an early if comprehensive and rare view of this thesis: puts the Judeo-Christian aspect towards a systematic, methodical human understanding called "science" into an elemental perspective "free" of religiosity. You can harmlessly hop over Spinoza and Popper and other "greats" here.) As some other commentators noted, political governance is also often sub-rational ie "human" ie, emotive. Humans are "political animals" and as Harold Bloom, a wonderful arbiter of culture in general put it his The Western Canon regarding those politicking for a "saner" society: "since when was society ever sane?"

A useful historical analyses-set I suggest to broadening your question in a practical manner is The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science by Burtt for the west-bias "big-picture-history" and The Rise Of Early Modern Science: Islam, China, and the West by Huff for a rare, maybe unique, look into Asian society, religion, and politics in terms of your question viz a viz the "west" and, for fruitful growth overall. (Both works are extensively foot-noted and could lead to even more elevated understanding of micro-problems involved in your question). Burtt marvelously shows the roots of philosophy in western Europe and its branches and directions: Huff intelligently questions Christianity and Islam. Both works are remarkably free of epistemological biases and teleological philosophical approaches to the subjects and are mostly histories based on presumed facts, which you can sort out and re-check.

The "ultimate solution" is of course no real solution in improving societies with science - but a journey -hopefully towards peaceful development blessed by increased human understanding constrained by impartial law, locally and internationally. The systematic, non-epistemological (indeed he could not "write") archaeologist Louis Binford - after more than a quarter century of "digging" (literally) brilliantly (to me) proposed that we on this earth all live in the past, future and present at once. His metaphor (in effect) was something like an anthropologist doing a present study on, say, the past's paleoindian remnants like the Yanomamo people in a South American jungle whilst watching a space rocket creasing the sky to investigate the future. The locals do not understand him, and he, not the spacecraft (etc.). To me this illustrates quite clearly that all human understanding is not only conditional, but relative and severely constrained by the killer facts of mortality and the tenuousness of impartial law's presence and strength.

The only country so far as I can see serving as a DELIBERATE departure from all world societies (and abundant evidence for this is found in eg Cohen's Science And the Founding Fathers: do see his footnotes) is the USA. The USA appears to have been founded partly on anthropological bases politically (the Iroquoise [sic] Confederation of central Great Lakes contact-period tribes) by Franklin (a great scientist by the way) and via systematic attempts at a modern political science not tied to classical (ie European) methods (to wit, the Federalist Papers) in a unique linkage which itself still requires better study. It is the only scientifically-founded state so far as I know in its attempt (it was definitely not a classical revolution) and as such, yields its own test-tube results in the form of evils to mankind that reveal an ABUSE of science in this republic's own operation, I would hazard, from an over-reliance placed upon some of some reified precepts (in the past, Eugenics: recently, Carbon Dioxide as a "poison" etc.) and so on. With eugenics, the old boy money network made it grow: with things like A bombs and killer chemicals, the science is nowadays STATE-SUPPORTED, TO INCLUDE STATE-CONTROLLED STATISTICIANS. Thus, you could tentatively say that even scientifically-designed societies are not free from mortality and the abnegation of law. If in making religious and royal societies "better" with science, it is wise to understand that its shining model - the USA - poses its own internal hazards towards not only the remainder of the world - but often, to its own very self.

Thanks for the reply Mr. Steven Yaskell!

The question concerns the cause of the lack of interest in higher education for the promotion of scientific leadership in government, not the philosophical evolution of the problem under discussion.

This complicit attitude of education allows the manipulation of the masses through ignorance and especially through political and religious dogma, unacceptable for the level of knowledge from the third millennium.

Regards,