We Know So Little About What Makes Humanity Prosper

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: Ezra Klein and Patrick Collison discuss why scientific and technological progress may be slowing despite massive increases in spending, people, and institutions. Collison argues that progress depends heavily on culture, institutions, and communication norms, and that current systems over-bureaucratize science and talent allocation. They explore progress studies, the Industrial Revolution, internet-era communication, war-driven innovation, and the need to build institutions that better unleash ambitious people and broadly spread gains.

Main Topics: Scientific slowdown and declining returns (Priority: 5/5): Collison argues that science may be yielding less per scientist and per dollar than in earlier eras, even as total research effort has exploded. He stresses the per-capita problem rather than a simple absolute slowdown. Culture and institutions as drivers of progress (Priority: 5/5): They discuss how scientific and economic progress depend on tacit knowledge, mentorship, institutional design, and local research cultures, which can vary dramatically between countries and labs. Progress studies and the fragility of advancement (Priority: 4/5): Collison frames progress as rare and contingent, not a default condition, and supports building an interdisciplinary field to study how societies sustain innovation over time. Internet, communication, and knowledge transmission (Priority: 4/5): The conversation weighs whether the internet accelerates collaboration and access to knowledge or degrades attention, civic discourse, and perhaps the very conditions that make productive thought possible. Institutions, bureaucracy, and talent allocation (Priority: 5/5): Collison criticizes the growing administrative burden in science and other fields, arguing that too much talent is trapped in grants, compliance, and procedural systems rather than discovery and building. Technology, geography, and political stability (Priority: 4/5): They explore how digital progress can both democratize opportunity and concentrate wealth and power in a few hubs, creating political risks if gains are not broadly shared. War, crisis, and innovation (Priority: 3/5): They debate whether threats and wartime mobilization accelerate progress. Collison is skeptical that war is a net driver of breakthroughs, and more favorable toward hope-based institution building.

Key Arguments: Science appears to be producing lower returns per scientist and per dollar than it did in earlier periods, based on survey work and broad output trends. The decisive variable in scientific progress is not just funding, but the culture and institutions that shape how researchers work and what they are able to pursue. Progress is historically fragile; the modern era of sustained improvement is unusual and should not be taken for granted. The internet likely creates large, under-measured welfare gains through education, remote collaboration, and access to tacit knowledge, even if it may worsen civic discourse. Scientific and technological systems increasingly waste elite talent on grant writing, administration, and compliance, reducing productive discovery time. Institutional sclerosis is real: organizations such as NASA, NIH, FDA, and others can become less effective over time due to drift, incentives, and bureaucracy. Broad prosperity and visible local benefits are essential for social stability; if people do not feel progress in their lives, political backlash grows. War can trigger innovations, but it also centralizes power and resources in ways that may reduce long-run diversity and experimentation. The best frontier for ambitious people is where they can have large impact; if physical-world domains become too hard, talent will migrate to digital or easier-to-enter arenas. A more optimistic path to progress is enabling young, ambitious people and building institutions that preserve speed, autonomy, and mission focus.

Data Points: Growth in science inputs/output: 20x to 100x - Collison says scientists, spending, papers, and journals grew by roughly this amount from 1950 to 2010. Scientific effort per capita: ~50x greater effort to compare against - He argues that if total effort rises 50-fold, discoveries would need to become proportionally more important to maintain constant per-capita returns. Survey of scientists on breakthrough significance: No field showed an exponentially improving trajectory - Collison and Nielsen surveyed scientists ranking Nobel-level breakthroughs; they found no discipline with clear exponential improvement over time. FAST Grants initial funding: About $10 million - Initial donor pool used to launch the rapid-grant program during early COVID-19. FAST Grants total disbursed: Slightly over $50 million - Collison says the initiative eventually funded around 200 grants globally, mostly in the U.S. FAST Grants applications: About 4,500 applications - The program was quickly inundated after launch despite promising 48-hour decisions. Scientist time spent on grants: About 40% - Surveyed grant recipients reported spending roughly this share of time on grant administration, authorship, and application work. Teenage girls reporting sadness/hopelessness: 54% - Collison cites CDC data as evidence of worsening recent social/health trends. Teenage girls reporting sadness/hopelessness in 2009: 20s percent range - He notes the same CDC measure was in the 20s as recently as 2009. Population that is pre-diabetic or diabetic: Half - Collison cites CDC data to illustrate serious modern health deterioration. Human history before agriculture: ~190,000 years - He notes Homo sapiens existed for most of their history without modern-like progress structures. Age of Homo sapiens: ~200,000 years - Used to emphasize how recent sustained progress is in human history. Industrial Revolution locus: England / UK - Discussed as the geographic origin of the modern growth takeoff. University leadership example: 32 years old - William Rainey Harper was appointed president of the University of Chicago at age 32, illustrating willingness to empower young leaders. University founder example: 29 years old - The founder behind the University of Limerick initiative was appointed in his late 20s, showing historical comfort with young institutional builders.

Pivotal Quotes: "Most systems get worse in at least certain ways as they scale." — Patrick Collison: Explaining why science and other large systems can become less efficient and more bureaucratic over time. "Four out of five chose the maximum option on our survey." — Patrick Collison: Describing how many scientists said they would change their research agenda a lot if freed from grant constraints. "The how of science just really matters." — Patrick Collison: Arguing that institutional details and culture, not just funding levels, shape scientific output.

Implications: The conversation suggests progress depends less on raw spending than on institutions, culture, and talent allocation. For science, tech, and policy, the big challenge is preserving experimentation, reducing bureaucracy, and ensuring benefits are broadly felt to maintain legitimacy and momentum.