What effect do you think projects like the Cambridge Project have on Defense Department decision-making?

They increase the likelihood that there will be an adequate and available body of knowledge which can be brought to bear upon policy decisions. There is a real prospect that by understanding processes better and by being able to catalogue data and have it on tap, we can make progress toward peace in the next few years that we've never made before.

From what other agencies has the Cambridge Project sought funding, and what has been the response of these agencies?

We have asked the NSF [National Science Foundation], the NIH [National Institute of Health], and two private foundations for money. They all told us that they didn't have funds of the order of magnitude that we needed.

Since Defense Department funding of the Cambridge Project is such a controversial issue, why can't the Cambridge Project be delayed until other sources of funding are found?

The way in which computer technology is developing puts very serious constraints on us: its development in the next few years may have a very profound effect for a rather long future. Only the very active participation of social scientists right now will succeed in directing the development of computer technology in ways advantageous to us.

Doesn't a university's acceptance of money from a political agency make it less likely to be independent and critical of that agency?

This has been a source of anxiety for many years, but evidence indicates that if outside funding is a factor in the development of the university, it's relatively minor factor.

I don't feel that university involvement with the Defense Department is very dangerous. The Defense Department is an integral part of American life, and I don't think that universities should feel threatened by it.