4 ms·
I really dislike this diagram. I think it just perpetuates a damaging stereotype about research, one that makes it harder for people trying to do (entirely val
by jamesrcole 14y ago
I really dislike this diagram. I think it just perpetuates a damaging stereotype about research, one that makes it harder for people trying to do (entirely valid) types of research that fall outside of the stereotype.
The stereotype is that research is about making every-more specialised contributions that extend existing work in finer and finer-grained ways.
What research falls outside of this stereotype? Synthesis. Theorising deeper foundations that connect disparate bits of knowledge and gives a deeper understanding of them.
Why is the stereotype damaging? It equates research with simply making more specialised extensions to existing research, which means that it's seen as "a good thing" for research to be sharply-focused on a very specific topic. In a slogan: narrowness good, breadth bad. Breadth is seen as lack of focus, trying to take on too much.
But breadth is not always bad. It depends on what kind of research you are doing. Breadth can actual simplify the task and make it easier, if your task is developing a deeper, underlying theory.
And if someone can develop a deeper theory, that work can have -- to relate this back to the diagram -- an impact that projects across and reshapes whole segments of the circle.
- Goladus 14y agoI don't find the article stereotyping. Failing to address the point that yes, sometimes research can be broad rather than specific, isn't stereotyping it's just that he's writing a blog post and not a book.
- gnosis 14y ago"What research falls outside of this stereotype? Synthesis. Theorising deeper foundations that connect disparate bits of knowledge and gives a deeper understanding of them." That reminds me of a quote attributed to Stefan Banach[1]: Good mathematicians see analogies between theorems ; great mathematicians see analogies between analogies. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Banach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Banach
- jostmey 14y agoDID YOU READ TO THE END OF THE DOCUMENT???? THE VERY END???? ALL I CAN SAY ABOUT IT JUST PLAIN "WOW".
- solistice 14y ago“The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.” - Nikolai Tesla.
- michaelhoffman 14y agoThe diagram isn't about "research." It is about doing a PhD. And for better or for worse, doing a PhD in the sciences usually involves making an improvement in a narrow area rather than something that addresses multiple areas. Frankly, doing that is much more difficult and often not really an appropriate topic for a PhD student because it is more likely to fail.
- acgourley 14y agoWhat's so wrong with failure?
- CognitiveLens 14y agofailure to get your PhD after 4-8 years of work is a pretty big risk to take (it generally means you will never get your PhD), particularly since you generally have much more freedom to pursue "risky" approaches to research after you have the degree, and even more so after you have tenure.
- fatjokes 14y agoyou have freedom after you receive tenure, but virtually no freedom before that. during your phd and postdoc, and certainly while you're tenure-track, you want to be pursuing projects that will nearly guarantee you publications at top-tier conferences / journals. so you don't want to be too risky, lest you go a few years without any good publications.
- seanmcdirmid 14y agoYou can always do it the wrong way and just research what you want. Surprisingly, I haven't starved to death yet.
- derleth 14y agoHave you finished anything yet?
- jakobe 14y agoThe idea that science is done discrete tiny steps is a bit disturbing to me. It's not just doing a PhD, it's all of academia. Most Funding Agencies give away their money in tiny chunks, for short term projects, for individuals or very small teams. And scientific publishing has moved to publishing scientific advances in tiny bits, one paper at a time. This works great for some things; but a lot of work is prohibited in this way. For example, it's almost impossible to get funding for databases or other long-term projects. Researchers that do work on long term projects constantly have to apply for new grants, always presenting their ongoing work as something completely new.