Journal of Cell Science 121, 1771 (2008)
The Importance of Stupidity in Science
Martin A. Schwartz
http://jcs.biologist...ull/121/11/1771
Nikou
0
11 replies to this topic
#1
-
- Active Members
-
- 53 posts
Enthusiast
Posted 23 February 2009 - 08:08 PM
Just thought you might like to read this essay
Journal of Cell Science 121, 1771 (2008)
The Importance of Stupidity in Science
Martin A. Schwartz
http://jcs.biologist...ull/121/11/1771
Nikou
Journal of Cell Science 121, 1771 (2008)
The Importance of Stupidity in Science
Martin A. Schwartz
http://jcs.biologist...ull/121/11/1771
Nikou
#2
-
- Active Members
-
- 59 posts
Enthusiast
Posted 24 February 2009 - 05:26 AM
when things go bad at lab, it's very interesting to known why? some times it helps to do new and more useful things
Chance favors the prepared mind
Louis Pasteur.
Louis Pasteur.
#3
-
- Active Members
-
- 4,997 posts
Veteran
Posted 24 February 2009 - 05:44 AM
we had this thread long ago as far as I can remember.
Simple living, highnot thinking
#4
-
- Active Members
-
- 552 posts
Veteran
Posted 24 February 2009 - 08:58 PM
Nabi, on Feb 25 2009, 12:44 AM, said:
we had this thread long ago as far as I can remember.
True, but that was BC (before the crash)...
Be nice to your bureaucrats: they control your budgets...
#5
-
- Active Members
-
- 124 posts
Veteran
Posted 26 February 2009 - 10:07 AM
This paper has won its ticket to the department's bulletin board. ^^
#6
-
- Active Members
-
- 14 posts
member
Posted 03 March 2009 - 06:36 AM
I think it's true what he says,... but how can one "enjoy" his/her stupidity when struggeling for grants?
#7
-
- Active Members
-
- 78 posts
Enthusiast
Posted 04 March 2009 - 01:34 AM
dersven, on Mar 3 2009, 06:36 AM, said:
I think it's true what he says,... but how can one "enjoy" his/her stupidity when struggeling for grants?
Absolutely true...
#8
-
- Members
-
- 3 posts
member
Posted 04 July 2009 - 07:42 PM
there is a very stupid person in our lab that keeps breaking things.
#9
-
- Active Members
-
- 328 posts
Veteran
Posted 05 July 2009 - 04:36 AM
Title not withstanding, the paper focused on feeling stupid - not stupidity per se. Clearly neither the author nor his attorney friend were stupid.
This signficance of the article is reinforced by the comments of Linus Pauling about the discovery of the double helix. Watson Crick et al. were in competition with his lab to discover the struture (tho they were so low on the fame scale that he was barely aware of their efforts). Despite his credentials as a Nobel laureatte and the power of money and talent, he lost out. When asked years later, he said that he figured no one could compete with him intellectually, resource-wise, etc. It was his to discover and he could do it at his leisure. Pauling certainly didn't feel stupid.
This signficance of the article is reinforced by the comments of Linus Pauling about the discovery of the double helix. Watson Crick et al. were in competition with his lab to discover the struture (tho they were so low on the fame scale that he was barely aware of their efforts). Despite his credentials as a Nobel laureatte and the power of money and talent, he lost out. When asked years later, he said that he figured no one could compete with him intellectually, resource-wise, etc. It was his to discover and he could do it at his leisure. Pauling certainly didn't feel stupid.
Edited by GeorgeWolff, 05 July 2009 - 04:43 AM.
#10
-
- Moderator
-
- 951 posts
Veteran
Posted 05 July 2009 - 12:56 PM
I agree. There is a distinct difference between feeling stupid and actually being stupid...
#12
-
- Active Members
-
- 24 posts
Enthusiast
Posted 22 October 2011 - 10:19 AM
here's the question:
how would you figure out if you are feeling stupid or you are really stupid?!
how would you figure out if you are feeling stupid or you are really stupid?!
