I agree that in a material sense life was better in 2002 than it had been at any point in the past; as is well known, middle- and lower-class standard of living has regressed since 2002.

I would offer a few more evidences to indicate wariness:

* US student performance in science and math has been steadily declining.  This is not due to greater minority access to education, but because performance of white students is declining.  (source)

* US absolute gov’t expenditures on basic science has been steadily declining.  (source PDF; commentary)

* Xenophobia results in counterproductive visa rules and licensing procedures which hurt US competitiveness.  (one example, an analysis of the visa situation)

All these, plus the general negative tenor towards rational thought, bode ill for US leadership in science and technology and future economic prosperity.  The techno-optimism that was present during the Cold War both among leadership and consumers seems to have faded, such that people forget where their wealth came from.

I am wondering why that is.

I agree that there are evidences to indicate wariness (xenophobia, paranoia because national security and others).  This last years wasn’t the best in the american history and the current president is not the best they had had, but, anyway, do you think that there was/is a drop in the rational thought?. Altough not sure, I don’t believe that the american society is less rational now than, lets say, 30 years ago.

Regarding the decline in the white students performance, I’d say I don’t see any trouble as long another groups take their place.

Just a point: in the figures you share about the R+D expenditures, I’d say that what is clear is trend toward the privatization of the acJust tivity, not a trend toward a absolute decrease in R+D expenditures. This trend is consistent with the global tendency to transfer things from the public ownership to the private.

Barto,

* Is American culture less rational now?  On the whole, probably not.  People are better educated than ever, use more technology.  But the decision makers seem to be, probably because the less rational voting bloc is better mobilized and everyone else is afraid to call them on their BS.  For example, Obama is dancing the fine line of being as openly religious a Democratic presidential candidate as I can recall, but still being the white-collar liberal policy-wise.

* If minority students ever surpass white students performance-wise, that would be a pleasant surprise.  At this time, high-performing groups like Asians are not numerous enough to overcome the poor performance of the white majority.

* By itself, the drop in gov’t funding for basic science would not be as alarming (I do not believe the private sector is capable of funding science that has no profit horizon).  However, combined with poor student performance and the general anti-science attitude in the media, I see it as a grave concern.  It’s just a matter of time before EU and Japan overtake US leadership, and attract the best minds from around the world instead of the US.

Hypnos,

Just to clarify, I don’t try to argue about how the american culture is now. I am just trying to reconcile two facts. The first: the papers I used to read in the college and the papers I use to read now are produced mostly by american universities. The second and contradictory: reading the americans (or the people living in america) complaining about the rising irrational movement in their society. In my college years I built a deep respect for the society producing so much valuable knowledge.

Regarding the rationality of the american culture, I’d say that those things depends on chance. The people usually vote thinking on how the economy is performing, or, in situations where they feel threatened, thinking in the elusive concept of security. If were are lucky, the person who convince the people he or she is able to improve the economy or make them feel safer has a good attitude toward science.

Regarding the antiscience atittudes, maybe in america is the media, but in europe there is a lot of posmodernism (the high class superstition). Here we are more influenced by european trends than north-american ( ey… after all we are americans too ) ones, and I’d say that Derrida, Irigaray, Latour are not exactly goods for the advance of science.

Barto,

I agree with what you say in the second and third paragraphs. 

In the first paragraph, one must recognize that the US has 300 million people and economic power comparable to all of the EU.  So, does the US really publish more papers in basic science than all the EU?  If so, will EU (and Japan) soon catch up and pass, and how about India and China?

Well, I certainly don’t have a statistic about the papers in basic science published by country and I take your point about the kownledge production relate to the size of the economies.

Also, take into account that I am not a scientist, so I studied just the basis of basic science. Maybe I am biased because, although I studied in the 90,  what I study about physics was produced in the 50, 60 and maybe the 70, but not beyond. Nowdays I just read papers regarding my primary fields (software development) and I have access to pharma industry because, among other things, I work for it.