4 ms·

Part of this is just the professionalization (bureaucratization) of research. Maybe in the future more independently wealthy people will simply do science for f

Part of this is just the professionalization (bureaucratization) of research. Maybe in the future more independently wealthy people will simply do science for fun.

blowfish721 5y ago
Going full circle then back into the old days when this was almost always the case. Sadly no matter if it’s the old way or the new way of doing research politics, ego and personal disputes will still always play a big part.
- dr_dshiv 5y ago
  Yes, and for better and for worse. “Science is friendship” isn’t far from the mark.
- lumost 5y ago
  We're going to have a relatively large number of children/inheritors to billion dollar scale fortunes within a decade or two. These individuals will have more money than they would ever need to use - however they will lack for prestige and impact. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them choose to create university positions for themselves, or otherwise "self-fund" their own prestige projects.
Nasrudith 5y ago
One potential saving grace is in falling costs of tools from technological advancement but science is a very broad subject where material demands vary greatly. Theoretical physics may have minimal material needs. A citizen scientest might be theoretically able to do something with CRISPR to say, modify e-coli to start producing carbon nanotubes or try to evolve plastic eating bacteria. But not making their own Large Hadron Collider. One would need a very complete picture to be able to accurately generalize in such an absurdly broad area.
- visarga 5y ago
  > Theoretical physics may have minimal material needs. I don't buy that because it's very expensive to experimentally prove the difference between various theories.
  - lokimedes 5y ago
    Exactly true. physics is an empirical science. The separation into “theoretical” and “experimental” (and “phenomenological” in-between) is a result of some haywire marketing that somehow has divided the scientific method up into specialized professions. The field of Physics though, is grounded in experimentation and observation. The lack of this grounding is called mathematics, philosophy or in the extreme case: religion. Best regards, A purebred experimentalist from the theoretical institute of physics at Blegdamsvej 17 (Niels Bohr’s Institute).
    - Jensson 5y ago
      > The field of Physics though, is grounded in experimentation and observation. The lack of this grounding is called mathematics Right, and the mathematical field where you use axioms matching physics experiments is called theoretical physics. Currently there is a lot of work to do in that domain, as currently we don't have any theories that matches well with all experimental data we have. We have small scale theories and big scale theories, but there still needs people to work out theories and formulas for combining the two. You might call that mathematics, other calls it theoretical physics, either way they will help further the field of physics and science in general.
philwelch 5y ago
So I recently came across an interesting idea that I think applies here. The idea is that "bureaucratization" and "professionalization" are actually opposites. This is a semantic argument, but the ideas themselves are interesting enough and we need to attach words to them either way, so let's just roll with it. A professional is someone you trust to do their job. Like a doctor or a lawyer. If you have a medical or a legal problem, you go to a professional and the professional uses their professional judgment to make a decision and works on your behalf to try and solve that problem. And they take personal responsibility for their professional decisions. For instance, when a professional engineer signs off on building plans, he is saying, "this building is not going to collapse and kill people, and if it does, I will take personal responsibility". A bureaucratic environment is an environment where processes and controls have supreme authority and there are no professionals. You have to jump through hoop A, fill out form B, and have everything reviewed by committee C to do anything because you are not a professional and your judgment isn't trusted. To some degree, this means doctors aren't fully professional anymore.
- throwawaygh 5y ago
  This is a nice story but I don't think it makes much sense. As you observed, by this definition surgeons are not professionals but the teenager who's the sole employee at a lemonade stand is a professional. The former is extremely constrained by bureaucracy while the latter can do pretty much whatever they want as long as nothing burns down or gets too many people too sick. Bureaucracy and professionalism are largely orthogonal. There are horrible bureaucracies where some individuals have immense power. In fact, that's probably way more common than not. There are also relative anarchies where no one has any real power because the whole org is completely beholden to the market in every aspect of its operation; e.g., most corner pubs on a crowded business street. Even the owners have at best marginal control over their employees and rented space. A professional is just someone who does the same sort of skilled work year over year for pay. Most blue collar workers think of themselves as professionals, and you'll see plenty of discussion of "professionalism" in any trades training program. Historically, the connotative notion of a "professional" that you're using here -- basically, upper-middle class professions with a certain amount of social esteem -- were always the most bureaucratic occupations. Have they gotten even more bureaucratic with time? Sure. But they were always more bureaucratic than other occupations of their time (mostly farming). Medicine or law being more bureaucratic than than farming is not a new thing.
hyperpallium2 5y ago
A return to the glorious days of the gentleman scientist! All you need is wealth and nothing to do. I wonder what such people currently do with their time? Actually, HN is a great place to ask this, as lots of them are here! wait
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

Part of this is just the professionalization (bureaucratization) of research. Maybe in the future more independently wealthy people will simply do science for fun.

blowfish721 5y ago

Going full circle then back into the old days when this was almost always the case. Sadly no matter if it’s the old way or the new way of doing research politics, ego and personal disputes will still always play a big part.

dr_dshiv 5y ago
Yes, and for better and for worse. “Science is friendship” isn’t far from the mark.
lumost 5y ago
We're going to have a relatively large number of children/inheritors to billion dollar scale fortunes within a decade or two. These individuals will have more money than they would ever need to use - however they will lack for prestige and impact. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them choose to create university positions for themselves, or otherwise "self-fund" their own prestige projects.

Nasrudith 5y ago

One potential saving grace is in falling costs of tools from technological advancement but science is a very broad subject where material demands vary greatly. Theoretical physics may have minimal material needs. A citizen scientest might be theoretically able to do something with CRISPR to say, modify e-coli to start producing carbon nanotubes or try to evolve plastic eating bacteria. But not making their own Large Hadron Collider. One would need a very complete picture to be able to accurately generalize in such an absurdly broad area.

visarga 5y ago
> Theoretical physics may have minimal material needs. I don't buy that because it's very expensive to experimentally prove the difference between various theories.
- lokimedes 5y ago
  Exactly true. physics is an empirical science. The separation into “theoretical” and “experimental” (and “phenomenological” in-between) is a result of some haywire marketing that somehow has divided the scientific method up into specialized professions. The field of Physics though, is grounded in experimentation and observation. The lack of this grounding is called mathematics, philosophy or in the extreme case: religion. Best regards, A purebred experimentalist from the theoretical institute of physics at Blegdamsvej 17 (Niels Bohr’s Institute).
  - Jensson 5y ago
    > The field of Physics though, is grounded in experimentation and observation. The lack of this grounding is called mathematics Right, and the mathematical field where you use axioms matching physics experiments is called theoretical physics. Currently there is a lot of work to do in that domain, as currently we don't have any theories that matches well with all experimental data we have. We have small scale theories and big scale theories, but there still needs people to work out theories and formulas for combining the two. You might call that mathematics, other calls it theoretical physics, either way they will help further the field of physics and science in general.

philwelch 5y ago

So I recently came across an interesting idea that I think applies here. The idea is that "bureaucratization" and "professionalization" are actually opposites. This is a semantic argument, but the ideas themselves are interesting enough and we need to attach words to them either way, so let's just roll with it. A professional is someone you trust to do their job. Like a doctor or a lawyer. If you have a medical or a legal problem, you go to a professional and the professional uses their professional judgment to make a decision and works on your behalf to try and solve that problem. And they take personal responsibility for their professional decisions. For instance, when a professional engineer signs off on building plans, he is saying, "this building is not going to collapse and kill people, and if it does, I will take personal responsibility". A bureaucratic environment is an environment where processes and controls have supreme authority and there are no professionals. You have to jump through hoop A, fill out form B, and have everything reviewed by committee C to do anything because you are not a professional and your judgment isn't trusted. To some degree, this means doctors aren't fully professional anymore.

throwawaygh 5y ago
This is a nice story but I don't think it makes much sense. As you observed, by this definition surgeons are not professionals but the teenager who's the sole employee at a lemonade stand is a professional. The former is extremely constrained by bureaucracy while the latter can do pretty much whatever they want as long as nothing burns down or gets too many people too sick. Bureaucracy and professionalism are largely orthogonal. There are horrible bureaucracies where some individuals have immense power. In fact, that's probably way more common than not. There are also relative anarchies where no one has any real power because the whole org is completely beholden to the market in every aspect of its operation; e.g., most corner pubs on a crowded business street. Even the owners have at best marginal control over their employees and rented space. A professional is just someone who does the same sort of skilled work year over year for pay. Most blue collar workers think of themselves as professionals, and you'll see plenty of discussion of "professionalism" in any trades training program. Historically, the connotative notion of a "professional" that you're using here -- basically, upper-middle class professions with a certain amount of social esteem -- were always the most bureaucratic occupations. Have they gotten even more bureaucratic with time? Sure. But they were always more bureaucratic than other occupations of their time (mostly farming). Medicine or law being more bureaucratic than than farming is not a new thing.

hyperpallium2 5y ago

A return to the glorious days of the gentleman scientist! All you need is wealth and nothing to do. I wonder what such people currently do with their time? Actually, HN is a great place to ask this, as lots of them are here! wait

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]