Despite being the very foundation of all advanced sciences and technologies, basic sciences are often perceived in the science policymaking and public understanding of developing countries as low-impact, low-utility, or isolated fields. This article, adopting a philosophical-analytical approach, examines five common misconceptions about the status of basic sciences from the perspective of philosophy of science:

1. The "epistemic fallacy" – conflating the goal of basic sciences (fundamental understanding) with that of applied sciences (product development);

2. The "institutional fallacy of policymakers" – imposing immediate output criteria on an activity that is inherently meaningful only within a long-term horizon;

3. The "fallacy of role assessment" – which, by ignoring historical evidence, overlooks the profound connection between basic research and major technologies;

4. The "functional fallacy of the university" – prioritizing technological development over the expansion and advancement of foundational knowledge; and

5. The "fallacy of delayed yield" – which renders the logic of long-term investment in basic sciences unintelligible.

The article argues that embracing the "logic of delayed yield" and substantially strengthening basic sciences is not a supererogatory choice, but rather a prerequisite for genuine innovation and sustainable progress in facing the unknown problems of the future, and for laying the groundwork to develop technologies of which we currently have no conception.