3 ms·

Nobel Disease

23 points by rendx 5y ago

COGlory 5y ago
As a scientist, I love that the Nobel Prize is occasionally awarded to deeply flawed, borderline insane people. For one, I believe it's a great humility check for the community at large. Also, I love watching the lengths others go to when they are forced to take a position counter to that of a Laureate, because it produces some spectacularly sound arguments. But more than anything I like seeing this because I think it is a great demonstration that we are not nearly as reasonable or rational as we like to think we are, and sometimes you get the best results by anti-flock/anti-pattern thinking, especially in new fields.
- burning_hamster 5y ago
  > But more than anything I like seeing this because I think it is a great demonstration that we are not nearly as reasonable or rational as we like to think we are, and sometimes you get the best results by anti-flock/antipattern thinking, especially in new fields. I don't think that the romanticism of their irrationality and contrarian bias is warranted. From my experience, a lot of researchers have that bias but they don't develop nobelitis, presumably because their crazier ideas are constantly challenged by their peers. Nobel laureates appear to lose that feedback, and some of them drift away into Lala-land. Given their disproportionate influence on policy, this could potentially be quite dangerous.
- bluepoint 5y ago
  Man, that last sentence of yours. Is it possible that breakthrough progress happens when semi crazy people that cannot think correctly pursue insane ideas and statistically some of them end up being right? If so the Nobel disease is actually a Nobel selection effect? It would be funny if this is the case.
sayonaraman 5y ago
i think this can be extended beyond Nobel as many famous scientists use their large audience to promote e.g. political ideology, Noam Chomsky being the prime example.
- AtlasBarfed 5y ago
  Are you trying to call Chomsky a crank like these guys? Chomsky isn't considered one of the prominent intellectuals of our time because of Chomsky hierarchies and other technical aspects of linguistics. And his "ideology" isn't considered the utterings of a crank about water memory.

23 points by rendx 5y ago

As a scientist, I love that the Nobel Prize is occasionally awarded to deeply flawed, borderline insane people. For one, I believe it's a great humility check for the community at large. Also, I love watching the lengths others go to when they are forced to take a position counter to that of a Laureate, because it produces some spectacularly sound arguments. But more than anything I like seeing this because I think it is a great demonstration that we are not nearly as reasonable or rational as we like to think we are, and sometimes you get the best results by anti-flock/anti-pattern thinking, especially in new fields.

burning_hamster 5y ago
> But more than anything I like seeing this because I think it is a great demonstration that we are not nearly as reasonable or rational as we like to think we are, and sometimes you get the best results by anti-flock/antipattern thinking, especially in new fields. I don't think that the romanticism of their irrationality and contrarian bias is warranted. From my experience, a lot of researchers have that bias but they don't develop nobelitis, presumably because their crazier ideas are constantly challenged by their peers. Nobel laureates appear to lose that feedback, and some of them drift away into Lala-land. Given their disproportionate influence on policy, this could potentially be quite dangerous.
bluepoint 5y ago
Man, that last sentence of yours. Is it possible that breakthrough progress happens when semi crazy people that cannot think correctly pursue insane ideas and statistically some of them end up being right? If so the Nobel disease is actually a Nobel selection effect? It would be funny if this is the case.

sayonaraman 5y ago

i think this can be extended beyond Nobel as many famous scientists use their large audience to promote e.g. political ideology, Noam Chomsky being the prime example.

AtlasBarfed 5y ago
Are you trying to call Chomsky a crank like these guys? Chomsky isn't considered one of the prominent intellectuals of our time because of Chomsky hierarchies and other technical aspects of linguistics. And his "ideology" isn't considered the utterings of a crank about water memory.