3 ms·
I would venture that doing original research should be given more weight than writing books. Books contained calcified knowledge that can be disseminated by so
by aswanson 17y ago
I would venture that doing original research should be given more weight than writing books.
Books contained calcified knowledge that can be disseminated by someone familiar with the field; a non-scientist as it were. This is the point of publications of popular science.
Original research that leads to new insights into a field are more difficult to obtain, require a higher level of skill and ability and therefore should be more important to a scientific reputation.
- Alex3917 17y agoBooks used to contain original research and theories. (Think Stanley Milgram's book Obedience.) It's only in the last 30 years that science books tend to just be collections of other people's papers rewritten for the lay audience. Because modern academia rewards people for churning out large amounts of derivative work but not for spending time coming up with groundbreaking theories, pretty much the only time scientists write books is when they get 600k advances (like Gilbert).