The concept of funding science education rather than other subjects is given significant importance, largely influenced by the aspiration for societal progression. Considering the evident benefits of social well-being at both material and moral levels, I totally agree with this thought.
To begin with, the fact that scientific technology plays a leading role in advancing societal development indicates that investment in science teaching is rewarding. In other words, the priority shown in the government’s investment encourages youngsters to dedicate themselves to this major knowing that the related jobs will be highly demanded after their graduation. Consequently, advancement in science and technology can be achieved due to a large amount of specialists in this field. For example, the advent of industry and the information era in history are primarily attributed to the technology innovation.
Admittedly, a voice may arise that other subjects such as art, and philosophy are equally important to science. Ironically, while these disciplines mainly focus on the moral ground, science development ought to be regarded as the foundation for a country to progress. For instance, it is the status quo in the world that art, philosophy, and culture are flourishing in developed countries where people live affluent lives, whereas , in those unprivileged regions, people are still suffering from a shortage of basic needs due to undeveloped technology. That is to say, a government should place more significance on science and technology breakthroughs which may also benefit higher-level development such as art and philosophy.
In conclusion, I maintain the idea that science teaching in school would bring tangible advantages to societal progression by cultivating an increasing number of experts in this area. In addition, the advancement in people’s material life would also boost the cultural boom for human civilisation.