3 ms·
Reputation is misleading. The Special Theory of Relativity is not good because Einstein wrote it. It stands on its own. We could even argue that a purely merit
by gonvaled 8y ago
Reputation is misleading. The Special Theory of Relativity is not good because Einstein wrote it. It stands on its own.
We could even argue that a purely meritocratic system of publishing will accelerate good quality research as opposed to a reputation based system.
Funding and career advance should be ortogonal to knowledge distribution.
- Vinnl 8y agoAbsolutely, but you're describing what the world ideally should be rather than what it actually is, I presume? :)
- jasode 8y ago>Reputation is misleading. The Special Theory of Relativity is not good because Einstein wrote it. It stands on its own. Your Einstein example actually contradicts your point about reputation. The mistake is using hindsight to judge that paper's quality. Instead, we have to imagine looking at that SR paper as if we lived in 1905 and didn't know if the 26-year-old patent clerk was a crackpot or a genius. Einstein sent his manuscript to an academic publisher where Max Planck was one of the editors. This is important because MP already had the reputation in physics so his recognition of Einstein's papers' value was taken seriously.[1] The journal itself also had a reputation which was reinforced by the reputation of its editors. In 1905, Einstein's papers didn't stand on their own. Its dissemination and acceptance was helped along by Max Plank's "stamp of approval". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Planck#Einstein_and_the_theory_of_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Planck#Einstein_and_the_th...
- StreamBright 8y agoSo do we need more people like Max Plank and Einstein or we need Elsevier?