2 ms·
>Is enough money spent on the sciences? No. Do scientists waste too much time on chasing funding? Yes. But is there an oversupply of scientists? Yeah, I'd say s
by jaclaz 9y ago
>Is enough money spent on the sciences? No. Do scientists waste too much time on chasing funding? Yes. But is there an oversupply of scientists? Yeah, I'd say so.
It is also possibly part of the reasons why, sure, still there should be a "fair" method to choose the "best" among the "many".
What I fear is happening now is that instead - given the current situation - the scarce funds available go not to the "best" scientists, but rather to the ones that are better at relations/PR/self-promotion, so not only you need to be able at whatever your field is, but you have to be very good at selling yourself (which is something the "typical" genius may not be so good at) and - at least I have this impression - the lack of security/funding makes scientists more selfish and averse to collaborations.
I cannot believe that in current times it would be possible, to make an example, that - should a new Srinivasa Ramanujan come out - there would be a Godfrey Hardy capable of recognising him and sponsoring/supporting him.
- Fomite 9y agoTo somewhat counter-balance this, in a recent grant panel I was on, several established, senior investigators were given a “pass” on methodological issues in their grants with “I’m sure X’s Lab knows what they’re doing...” while younger investigators got eviscerated. “X is a genius” is a form of PR.
- jaclaz 9y ago>To somewhat counter-balance this ... I am missing the counter-balance effect, it seems to me we are saying the same thing, the "senior investigators" were passed not because they were geniuses (or not only because of this) but rather because they managed to get the reputation of genius[1], while "younger investigator" got eviscerated not because they were not (possibly) geniuses, but rather because they had not such a reputation preceding them. [1] BTW not necessarily undeserved
- Fomite 9y agoI wasn't satisfied with "counter-balance" as a word when I wrote that, honestly. It was mostly more the idea that what counts as "PR" for a senior academic isn't necessarily intuitive.