coffee_rules Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 Quite an insight into the culture of academia in science Do you agree @BacktoCricaddict? dial_100 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 55 minutes ago, coffee_rules said: Quite an insight into the culture of academia in science Do you agree @BacktoCricaddict? @urbestfriend had posted this some time ago. Here was my response: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 (edited) 49 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said: @urbestfriend had posted this some time ago. Here was my response: How about innovation that has only come from the fringe, the contrarians than those who are conformists ? You can’t challenge the status quo with academia having a mafiaso hold on knowledge systems. This model is bad for innovation Edited June 1, 2021 by coffee_rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 No, Infact demand for niche subjects is even higher then Unis can produce and hence all these informal sectors have come to fill the space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said: You can’t be a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist by reading in GU. But there are enough bogus and mediocre experts in Social sciences, Humanities, Economics and Diplomacy to apply the same logic. This mediocrity hides behind peer-reviewed crap and promote the age old theories in academia in areas of History, AIT, Journalism, Literature and Environmental science etc. . Edited June 1, 2021 by coffee_rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BacktoCricaddict Posted June 1, 2021 Share Posted June 1, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, coffee_rules said: You can’t be a brain surgeon or a rocket scientist by reading in GU. ... or a molecular biologist, geneticist, biochemist, microbiologist or clinical researcher. There are strong theoretical and practical foundations that can only be learned by rigorous practice in a laboratory. I don't know enough to comment about the humanities. But I agree about environmental and sustainability studies. There is a lot of nonsense that comes out there. It is not because there is peer-review, but because peer-review is done with "nature knows best" or "all development is bad" glasses, and anything that goes against that religion is dismissed (e.g., GMOs, gene-editing, synthetic fertilizer etc.). As far as your innovation point goes from the other post: I can only speak for my field. Even if some innovation occurs, it must be vetted against certain standards of research rigor before they can be accepted. If someone claims that a particular molecule or herbal extract has a positive outcome when used to treat a particular affliction, it must be tested rigorously before that claim can be verified. I have said many times here - I have a molecule in my lab that is a strong inhibitor of an enzyme that HIV requires. It is also quite a non-toxic molecule. If it comes out successful, it will be a significant innovation. But until I can show that it actually works in HIV-affected individuals using measurable outcomes and biological/statistical significance, it is not a medicine. mRNA vaccines are an example of great innovation coming from the fringes. Katalin Kariko worked in the fringes for a long time, and she believed that her innovation will save the world, but others were skeptical of her new paradigm. That doesn't mean scientists were stifling her innovation, they were challenging her to put it beyond doubt. She did not just go out there and whine (unlike Allen Savory, an ecologist masquerading as an agricultural scientist) that she is being stifled by special interests, but worked relentlessly to meet the required experimental standards and prove beyond doubt that her concept was feasible. Companies then took it and ran with it. Edited June 1, 2021 by BacktoCricaddict diga 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.baae6521c2eb9c202110b14b123d4f14.jpg)
Recommended Posts