4 ms·

Well, maybe we just disagree. I think it's very unlikely that most or all the people to use 'scientist' in that way are all three of: non-English speaking; base

Well, maybe we just disagree. I think it's very unlikely that most or all the people to use 'scientist' in that way are all three of: non-English speaking; based in the sciences (for it would not be possible to conflate the two otherwise), and ignorant of the distinction, or just indisposed toward using it. How can you equate them? I don't see it personally. Science is defined by the scientific method. Most of the humanities do not use the scientific method most of the time (history, philosophy, sociology, English, etc.)

Vinnl 9y ago
> Well, maybe we just disagree. I guess :) (Note also that you don't need to be based in the sciences - you can also just not be in academia.) I can equate them in this context because OP said: > Scientists can't have their cake and eat it too. Either they fund their own research and publish in prestigious expensive journals that cost the public money, or they take public money and make the research available for all. The same holds true for those in the humanities, right?