4 ms·

government and law trumping math and science. It saddens me.

anigbrowl 9y ago
Nothing got trumped. He would have been fine if he had made the exact same argument with asserting that he was an engineer, a claim that has specific legal implications that are easily verified. If you wrote an article on cardiology, and you said 'I am a doctor' but you hadn't kept your medical license current, then it would be a false claim, regardless of the fact that your article on cardiology was 100% true. Asserting a privileged status that you do not hold misleads people who rely on the licensure system as a proxy for performing due diligence. Professionalism is about more than whether people are willing to pay you or not. It involves commitment to uphold particular standards even if it is not in your personal interest to do so.
- madengr 9y ago
  Though a Dr. is anyone with a doctorate.
- flamedoge 9y ago
  There appears to be desire to adhere to whatever legal framework to give power and authority to status based on education and history. However, certain things are absolute and trumps any legal framework. Math and science don't change or abide by human laws. Discrediting work based on credentials may work in other fields, but you can't discredit math and science *by anything other than themselves.
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    Nobody is trying to discredit the math and science. I have no objection to his proposal and neither does anyone else. The issues is that he tried to use the social construct of credentials to get attention for his proposal in a manner that bordered on fraud (since he was first given a friendly warning about the inappropriateness of titling himself as an engineer). This is not an attack on math and science no matter how much you want to see it that way. If he had been frank about his amateur status from the outset hew would have had no problem. getting it wrong without bad intentions is nothing serious either, but after he was warned and agreed to abide by the state code, he had no excuse to repeat the behavior. You can come up with the most interesting scientific result in history, but that does not give you an automatic right to have your discovery implemented by others, does it?
- emmelaich 9y ago
  > ... with asserting that he was an engineer, ... without?
  - anigbrowl 9y ago
    Yeah the edit clock had run out by the time I noticed that. sorry for the confusion.

Nothing got trumped. He would have been fine if he had made the exact same argument with asserting that he was an engineer, a claim that has specific legal implications that are easily verified. If you wrote an article on cardiology, and you said 'I am a doctor' but you hadn't kept your medical license current, then it would be a false claim, regardless of the fact that your article on cardiology was 100% true. Asserting a privileged status that you do not hold misleads people who rely on the licensure system as a proxy for performing due diligence. Professionalism is about more than whether people are willing to pay you or not. It involves commitment to uphold particular standards even if it is not in your personal interest to do so.

madengr 9y ago
Though a Dr. is anyone with a doctorate.
flamedoge 9y ago
There appears to be desire to adhere to whatever legal framework to give power and authority to status based on education and history. However, certain things are absolute and trumps any legal framework. Math and science don't change or abide by human laws. Discrediting work based on credentials may work in other fields, but you can't discredit math and science *by anything other than themselves.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Nobody is trying to discredit the math and science. I have no objection to his proposal and neither does anyone else. The issues is that he tried to use the social construct of credentials to get attention for his proposal in a manner that bordered on fraud (since he was first given a friendly warning about the inappropriateness of titling himself as an engineer). This is not an attack on math and science no matter how much you want to see it that way. If he had been frank about his amateur status from the outset hew would have had no problem. getting it wrong without bad intentions is nothing serious either, but after he was warned and agreed to abide by the state code, he had no excuse to repeat the behavior. You can come up with the most interesting scientific result in history, but that does not give you an automatic right to have your discovery implemented by others, does it?
emmelaich 9y ago
> ... with asserting that he was an engineer, ... without?
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Yeah the edit clock had run out by the time I noticed that. sorry for the confusion.