Money for postgraduate research is limited, therefore, some people think financial support from governments should be only provided for scientific research rather than for less useful subjects. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Nowadays, some people have been arguing that scientific research should be given financial support much more than less important subjects because of limited money. In this essay, I am going to explore why I disagree with this view.
First of all, a large number of colleges would have difficulty in attracting new students for majors unrelated to scientific research. This is mainly because, students are likely to choose a major with abundant the governmental finance. If less significant subjects, such as sociology or art, can not receive adequate funding, these kinds of curriculum would be fade away. Therefore, only few majors contributing to scientific research would be left in colleges that students will lose a chance of what field they seriously want to study.
In addition, students doing research on science would be fall into idleness. The chief reason is that postgraduates studying science do not need to try anymore to receive funding of the government, therefore, their outcome would be hard to be achieved enough. For example, since most students have to submit the report related to their research, which consists of a number of reasons to be supported with money, they have a real passion and desire for their studies. Additionally, nation's competitiveness would be disappeared and it would suffer an enormous loss because there is no reason for students having scientific major to study hard. Consequently, if the governmental funding were given to the only one filed, colleges and countries would have serious damages.
In conclusion, it is the most important that balanced the government's budget should be provided on every research fields.