More to the point, criticism of others' work is part of the job description of a researcher. I guess people don't realise that, but what happens during peer rev

More to the point, criticism of others' work is part of the job description of a researcher. I guess people don't realise that, but what happens during peer review is exactly that: criticism. Unpitiable, unrelenting, and, hopefully, constructive and such that it helps the poor target of it improve their work. Speaking from experience, it is not something that one is prepared to receive. School, university, work- I don't think anything prepares you for the sensation of someone treading roughshod over your hard work, and your dreams. It's like a stab through the heart. A stab in the back. But, you know. You get better. And you learn, hopefully, to not be too harsh, and to be constructive, yourself. Anyway, science is a debate and there's no debate without disagreement. I don't reckon people really understand how much what Gary Marcus is doing is necessary for scientific progress. And it's hugely disappointing to see the constant attacks against him, against his person and his character.