Andreas Frew implies that a system of giving out research grants at random is a silly idea (Forum, Washington Diary, 27 January, p 50). I feel that random decision-making deserves a serious analysis and should not be dismissed in so cavalier a fashion.
The world is one of imperfect information, so while rational argument may reduce the possible courses of action, it rarely leads to a unique decision. We then have to invoke phrases such as "expensive" or "judgment" to resolve the problem.
Let me try to illustrate this. Some years ago, I asked my head of department for a decision. Some time passed so I went to ask what his decision was. He explained that he had difficulty in deciding because he did not have enough information. When pressed further, he admitted that he would never have enough information, so he made a decision, anyway.
The second example concerns ...
To continue reading this article, subscribe to receive access to all of newscientist.com, including 20 years of archive content.