Every so often I run across Hamming's You and Your Research, and different things stick out at me every time I find it. The big take home message of the speech is if you want to do important work, you have to work on important problems. There are many other tidbits of advice and observations about doing scientific work, and the part that jumped out at me this time is:
"On the other hand, we can't always give in. There are times when a certain amount of rebellion is sensible. I have observed almost all scientists enjoy a certain amount of twitting the system for the sheer love of it. What it comes down to basically is that you cannot be original in one area without having originality in others. Originality is being different. You can't be an original scientist without having some other original characteristics. But many a scientist has let his quirks in other places make him pay a far higher price than is necessary for the ego satisfaction he or she gets. I'm not against all ego assertion; I'm against some."
Here he is talking about whether or not it's worth it to get worked up about small injustices. In his opinion, it is not possible to be both a first-rate scientist and a reformer of the system, as trying to do both at once takes too much energy for most people. I don't know if that's true or not, though it does have striking implications for people who try to be reformers in engineering/science fields if it is true.
He got me thinking about originality: is it true that people who are original in one area are original in others as well? From his definition originality is being different, or thinking for yourself instead of just taking the usual approach. Perhaps what he is getting at is that people who question dogma tend to question it in all areas of their life. But are all types of originality created equal?
More Changes
1 week ago
I mostly love the Hamming thing, except for the part about reforming. I think what he's saying about that is to be practical about not sacrificing your career on the altar of attempted reform. But I think the way he said it tends to discourage all attempts at reform, which is bad. Especially when younger people are not in a position to fix anything for longer and longer, as training gets longer and longer and getting a job with sufficient security to attempt reform gets rarer and rarer.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if all types of originality are equal. But I do think he's onto something. Sadly, science actually abhors originality.
Ms. PhD- have you read Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt? It's a Physics PhD's account of grad school/post doccing and how it tends to select for people who think the same way. He argues that it is important to try to change the system, but it is more effective to try if you have gained some power (aka, getting sufficient security, like you mention).
ReplyDelete