THE QUESTION posed by the title of my talk would have seemed completely frivolous only a few years ago, say at the start of the last decade, when the regard for universities as intellectual and research centers was at an unparalleled high. Almost everyone accepted without reservation the premise that the pursuit of basic and applied research in the physical sciences in universities was of vital importance to the military security of the United States and to its economic well-being. As long as the defense motivation for doing research was paramount, the nation was willing to support rather uncritically, through the federal government, a large-scale and rapidly growing research and development effort. This confidence in the value of research carried over to the healthrelated areas; funding for ever-growing programs in the biological sciences was easily forthcoming with the expectation that the knowledge obtained would enhance the development of medical care. But because of the narrowness of these motivations, many important intellectual disciplines were not supported. Even as important a field as chemistry, which had clear relevence to health care and to defense, was neglected; the behavioral and social sciences were financed only slightly, and many creative efforts important to a wellbalanced society, such as those in the humanities were totally ignored. I failed rather miserably to stimulate governmental support for programs in behavioral and social sciences when I was Special Assistant for Science and Technology to President Kennedy, and only recently has the government begun to provide support for these fields. I believe that the serious imbalances created within the universities by this distorted funding pattern has been a significant factor in the current difficulties. Today many questions are being raised about the role of technology in the society by decision makers in both the congressional and executive branches of the government as well as the general public. Other requirements as diverse as the

Vietnam war and the needs of our cities seem to be more urgent than basic science, to the point that the continued vitality of fundamental science is seriously threatened. Coincidentally, universities are confronted with other financial difficulties which have amplified the effects of the crisis in research support. Independent of the severe financial difficulties that threaten university research, conditions and attitudes within the university and in the broader community are making it increasingly difficult for the university scholar to concentrate on his creative work. Distractions on some major campuses have increased to the extent that one distinguished American intellectual leader I know is advocating the creation of a series of research centers, actually research sanctuaries, isolated from the turmoil of the contemporary university scene for scholars who want to concentrate on their studies. He maintains that within a decade it will be impossible to do high-quality research in the tempestuous. embattled atmosphere of the university, and in order to assure progress, scientists interested in pursuing serious creative careers will have to do their work in independent, buffered environments, decoupled from the politicized preoccupations of the campus. While this may seem an overly pessimistic assessment of the filture there are, to be sure, many more reasons for StlCh a pessimistic outlook than there are for optimism If one attempted to interpret the many bits of evidence regarding the future of universities as intellectual centers in the way that an economic analyst attempts to predict future economic trends by examination of the various fiscal business indicators he would have to conclude that, as they say in economic predictions, "this is a moment for caution and restraint rather than one of buoyant optimism." In a recent article in Science magazine entitled "In Defense of Science," Dr. Alvin Weinberg, Director of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory said that science in the United States is under attack on four fronts, that is, by four separate