Uploaded May 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
For generations, science has advanced through a tension between caution and ambition. On one hand, the scientific method depends on skepticism, replication, and evidence. On the other hand, history’s greatest discoveries often began as improbable ideas pursued by researchers willing to solve the world’s biggest problems. Modern science has given us the ability to edit our genes, life-saving vaccines, and a glimpse at the origins of the universe. But is the system that produced these breakthroughs holding itself back?
Critics argue that the pressure to publish — and the incentive structures around citation, peer review, and career advancement — rewards safe, incremental work over bold thinking and big swings, with competition for funding reinforcing those same tendencies. Yet others see a system still capable of paradigm-shifting discoveries — one where large, worldwide collaborations and long-term thinking motivate scientists to pursue grand, ambitious ideas. They argue that careful review and rigorous standards are not barriers to innovation, but the very conditions that make reliable breakthroughs possible.
With this background, we debate the question: Is the Scientific Enterprise Too Risk-Averse?
This debate was produced in partnership with the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, as part of The Hopkins Forum series.
Arguing Yes:
Tyler Cowen, Author of "The Great Stagnation"; Economics Professor at George Mason University; Founder of Emergent Ventures; Host of "Conversations with Tyler" podcast
Brandon Ogbunu, Computational Biologist; Associate Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Yale University; Professor at the Santa Fe Institute
Arguing No:
Kate Biberdorf (“Kate the Chemist”), Professor for the Public Understanding of Science and the Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry at the University of Notre Dame; Science Entertainer
The Honorable Sethuraman Panchanathan, 15th Director of the National Science Foundation; University Professor of Technology and Innovation and Foundation Chair at Arizona State University
Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates
#science #risk #averse
Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter.
===================================
Subscribe on Substack: opentodebate.substack.com/
Official site: opentodebate.org/
X: twitter.com/OpentoDebateOrg
Facebook: facebook.com/BeOpentoDebate/
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/company/opentodebate/
Instagram: instagram.com/opentodebateorg/
TikTok: tiktok.com/@opentodebateorg
Open to Debate Apple Podcasts: tinyurl.com/bdzmz5xt
Open to Debate Spotify Podcasts: tinyurl.com/22tuxu7h
===================================
00:00:00 — Introduction: Is the Scientific Enterprise Too Risk-Averse?
00:01:29 — Welcome from the SNF Agora Institute
00:03:29 — Foreword with Johns Hopkins President Ronald J. Daniels
00:07:13 — Introduction of Debaters
00:11:08 — Opening Statement: Brandon Ogbunu (Arguing Yes)
00:15:29 — Opening Statement: Sethuraman Panchanathan (Arguing No)
00:20:08 — Opening Statement: Tyler Cowen (Arguing Yes)
00:25:30 — Opening Statement: Kate Biberdorf (Arguing No)
00:30:11 — Moderator Summary
00:32:08 — Is Bold Scientific Research Still Happening?
00:40:31 — Academia vs. Industry: Who Takes Bigger Risks?
00:44:29 — Are Biomedical Regulations Slowing Innovation?
00:48:39 — The Human Genome Project and Long-Term Scientific Bets
00:52:21 — Should Scientists Be Penalized for Failure?
00:54:19 — What is the Role of Democracy in Managing Risks?
00:57:34 — Who Creates Risk Aversion in Science?
01:02:01 — What is the Definition of “Risk” in Science?
01:04:37 — Does “Publish or Perish” Crush Scientific Risk-Taking?
01:07:27 — How Can Scientists Communicate With the Public?
01:09:06 — Closing Statement: Brandon Ogbunu
01:10:54 — Closing Statement: Kate Biberdorf
01:12:17 — Closing Statement: Tyler Cowen
01:14:02 — Closing Statement: Sethuraman Panchanathan
01:17:01 — Voting Results
For generations, science has advanced through a tension between caution and ambition. On one hand, the scientific method depends on skepticism, replication, and evidence. On the other hand, history’s greatest discoveries often began as improbable ideas pursued by researchers willing to solve the world’s biggest problems. Modern science has given us the ability to edit our genes, life-saving vaccines, and a glimpse at the origins of the universe. But is the system that produced these breakthroughs holding itself back?
Critics argue that the pressure to publish — and the incentive structures around citation, peer review, and career advancement — rewards safe, incremental work over bold thinking and big swings, with competition for funding reinforcing those same tendencies. Yet others see a system still capable of paradigm-shifting discoveries — one where large, worldwide collaborations and long-term thinking motivate scientists to pursue grand, ambitious ideas. They argue that careful review and rigorous standards are not barriers to innovation, but the very conditions that make reliable breakthroughs possible.
With this background, we debate the question: Is the Scientific Enterprise Too Risk-Averse?
This debate was produced in partnership with the Stavros Niarchos Foundation (SNF) Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, as part of The Hopkins Forum series.
Arguing Yes:
Tyler Cowen, Author of "The Great Stagnation"; Economics Professor at George Mason University; Founder of Emergent Ventures; Host of "Conversations with Tyler" podcast
Brandon Ogbunu, Computational Biologist; Associate Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Yale University; Professor at the Santa Fe Institute
Arguing No:
Kate Biberdorf (“Kate the Chemist”), Professor for the Public Understanding of Science and the Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry at the University of Notre Dame; Science Entertainer
The Honorable Sethuraman Panchanathan, 15th Director of the National Science Foundation; University Professor of Technology and Innovation and Foundation Chair at Arizona State University
Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates
#science #risk #averse
Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter.
===================================
Subscribe on Substack: opentodebate.substack.com/
Official site: opentodebate.org/
X: twitter.com/OpentoDebateOrg
Facebook: facebook.com/BeOpentoDebate/
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/company/opentodebate/
Instagram: instagram.com/opentodebateorg/
TikTok: tiktok.com/@opentodebateorg
Open to Debate Apple Podcasts: tinyurl.com/bdzmz5xt
Open to Debate Spotify Podcasts: tinyurl.com/22tuxu7h
===================================
00:00:00 — Introduction: Is the Scientific Enterprise Too Risk-Averse?
00:01:29 — Welcome from the SNF Agora Institute
00:03:29 — Foreword with Johns Hopkins President Ronald J. Daniels
00:07:13 — Introduction of Debaters
00:11:08 — Opening Statement: Brandon Ogbunu (Arguing Yes)
00:15:29 — Opening Statement: Sethuraman Panchanathan (Arguing No)
00:20:08 — Opening Statement: Tyler Cowen (Arguing Yes)
00:25:30 — Opening Statement: Kate Biberdorf (Arguing No)
00:30:11 — Moderator Summary
00:32:08 — Is Bold Scientific Research Still Happening?
00:40:31 — Academia vs. Industry: Who Takes Bigger Risks?
00:44:29 — Are Biomedical Regulations Slowing Innovation?
00:48:39 — The Human Genome Project and Long-Term Scientific Bets
00:52:21 — Should Scientists Be Penalized for Failure?
00:54:19 — What is the Role of Democracy in Managing Risks?
00:57:34 — Who Creates Risk Aversion in Science?
01:02:01 — What is the Definition of “Risk” in Science?
01:04:37 — Does “Publish or Perish” Crush Scientific Risk-Taking?
01:07:27 — How Can Scientists Communicate With the Public?
01:09:06 — Closing Statement: Brandon Ogbunu
01:10:54 — Closing Statement: Kate Biberdorf
01:12:17 — Closing Statement: Tyler Cowen
01:14:02 — Closing Statement: Sethuraman Panchanathan
01:17:01 — Voting Results
