Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Submit your paper to J Biol Methods today!
Photo
- - - - -

My PI wont follow the evidence


  • Please log in to reply
83 replies to this topic

#16 Doki

Doki

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 265 posts
1
Neutral

Posted 02 August 2009 - 01:35 AM

PIs are PIs because they can look beyond what we can see. It takes a lot to be a PI and they are PI because they have an understanding what to believe and what not to believe and how to make others believe what they believe.

and I don't believe that you actually believe this.... :lol:

there is no other belief to believe than to believe that this belief is true and believe it till I am in a position to believe in what I actually believe and make other believe in it too.
Simple living, highnot thinking

#17 casandra

casandra

    carpe diem by the jugulum

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts
55
Excellent

Posted 02 August 2009 - 09:29 AM

PIs are PIs because they can look beyond what we can see. It takes a lot to be a PI and they are PI because they have an understanding what to believe and what not to believe and how to make others believe what they believe.

and I don't believe that you actually believe this.... :lol:

there is no other belief to believe than to believe that this belief is true and believe it till I am in a position to believe in what I actually believe and make other believe in it too.

oh yeah, I definitely believe that you believe in this unbelievable belief but still a belief that can be believed nonetheless...BB. We shld transfer this to the philosophy and beliefs forum....:)...
"Oh what a beauteousness!"
- hobglobin, personal comment about my beauteous photo......

#18 Doki

Doki

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 265 posts
1
Neutral

Posted 02 August 2009 - 05:54 PM

Might be an unbelievable belief but to believe the belief that we can believe in our PIs belief is the only belief we should believe in. If we do not believe in our PIs belief then to work to make other believe that this belief is believable is not right. For the moment, to believe or not to believe is not the question.

@ Casandra : I believe what you said.
Simple living, highnot thinking

#19 casandra

casandra

    carpe diem by the jugulum

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts
55
Excellent

Posted 02 August 2009 - 07:59 PM

If we do not believe in our PIs belief then to work to make other believe that this belief is believable is not right. For the moment, to believe or not to believe is not the question.

Touché.....and also, we shld follow Bertrand Russell's advice: "I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." :)

Seriously, going back to the original post, do we (as students, tech staff etc) have the right or enough guts and gumption to question or even challenge the "beliefs" of our PI? What shld we do if we feel that our belief in his beliefs are no longer justified as in ejim's case?
"Oh what a beauteousness!"
- hobglobin, personal comment about my beauteous photo......

#20 GeorgeWolff

GeorgeWolff

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts
0
Neutral

Posted 02 August 2009 - 08:17 PM

It's science - not belief. As I said, identify and get agreement to the pivotal experiment

#21 casandra

casandra

    carpe diem by the jugulum

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts
55
Excellent

Posted 03 August 2009 - 01:59 AM

Hmm...trust GeorgeWolff to rain on our parade with his dry one-liners altho he's got a point...if we're not nit-picking, science is still a kind of belief system (and in our latest posts, we were using "belief" here in the most mundane, everyday kind of way but that's beside the point :)) altho the knowledge produced using the scientific method is process-based, empirically-confirmed and what they call as justified true belief as opposed to faith, of course.

And back to the OP, how do you get the PI to sit with you to identify and agree on a pivotal experiment if he's being unyielding, stubborn and stuck to his own hypotheses?
"Oh what a beauteousness!"
- hobglobin, personal comment about my beauteous photo......

#22 HomeBrew

HomeBrew

    Veteran

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 930 posts
15
Good

Posted 03 August 2009 - 05:16 PM

I once chased something only I truly believed in -- it turned out I was right, and that finding and its implications ultimately translated into a couple of grants and a half dozen papers.... Of course, I've also often been wrong, too -- many times...

#23 Doki

Doki

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 265 posts
1
Neutral

Posted 03 August 2009 - 06:33 PM

That is the true spirit . .chasing something that we believe is true and examining it by science. If what we believe is true - it is a big finding; and if we end up knowing what we believe is not true - that is even bigger finding.
Simple living, highnot thinking

#24 GeorgeWolff

GeorgeWolff

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts
0
Neutral

Posted 04 August 2009 - 03:28 AM

Sounds like the original poster is as "unyielding, stubborn and stuck to his own hypotheses" as anyone. We're not aware that this one has attempted to arrive at a compelling experimental design with his employer or to understand why data so "strong", to his less experienced and less educated mind, are not driving his employer to a different conclusion.
Elitist or not - the person is a lab tech, not a grad student or post doc., who works at the pleasure and direction of the PI.

Remember - convincing the skeptical is our charge in the critical scientific community.

#25 perneseblue

perneseblue

    Unlimited ligation works!

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
16
Good

Posted 04 August 2009 - 06:02 AM

The flip side to this coin, is that the "far more experienced" and "more educated mind" of this PI has failed to engage and convince his "humble" employee that said employee is in error.

Remember - convincing the skeptical is our charge in the critical scientific community.

And that road is a two way street.

But yes, I do agree. ejim should attempt to speak with his PI some more to try to at least run an experiment that would validate or falsify on hypothesis or the other. And realistically, ejim would probably have to go down my path; doing one failed experiment after another until PI is willing to accept that his hypothesis is in error.

Original poster is as "unyielding, stubborn and stuck to his own hypotheses" as anyone

Well there is that. :)

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - M. Planck

:( Always examine your pet hypothesis. It is not what you don't know, but what you think you know that will get you.
May your PCR products be long, your protocols short and your boss on holiday

#26 casandra

casandra

    carpe diem by the jugulum

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts
55
Excellent

Posted 04 August 2009 - 06:53 AM

The flip side to this coin, is that the "far more experienced" and "more educated mind" of this PI has failed to engage and convince his "humble" employee that said employee is in error.


I was thinking of the same thing..tech staff or grad student regardless, the least the PI could do is explain to his subordinates why the data is not strong enough to change the direction of their research, if he has acess to additional information then he should share it...is that too much to ask? One with a "less experienced" and "less educated" mind is probably more open and more willing to listen....unless of course the PI doesn't care and is just flexing his elitist muscles....

Original poster is as "unyielding, stubborn and stuck to his own hypotheses" as anyone


Well there is that. :)


and I second that....I wonder who's the most stubborn here...




hey ejim......come back in here....you can't do a post and run...:(..

Edited by casandra, 04 August 2009 - 07:01 AM.

"Oh what a beauteousness!"
- hobglobin, personal comment about my beauteous photo......

#27 HomeBrew

HomeBrew

    Veteran

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 930 posts
15
Good

Posted 04 August 2009 - 07:21 AM

Elitist or not - the person ... works at the pleasure and direction of the PI.


Quite true. I should point out that the personal example I mentioned above was pursued with the approval, albeit originally somewhat skeptical, of my PI at the time...

Remember - convincing the skeptical is our charge in the critical scientific community.


Strongly agree. In my lab, we try and be our own worst critics by anticipating objections to our interpretations and exploring alternative explanations for the data.

#28 casandra

casandra

    carpe diem by the jugulum

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts
55
Excellent

Posted 04 August 2009 - 11:47 AM

Elitist or not - the person is a lab tech, not a grad student or post doc., who works at the pleasure and direction of the PI.

Remember - convincing the skeptical is our charge in the critical scientific community.


I also completely agree.... but to be convincing you need to present evidence, otherwise it's not science but just philosophy. But if we follow this line of reasoning, are lab techs part of this skeptical population that needs convincing?
"Oh what a beauteousness!"
- hobglobin, personal comment about my beauteous photo......

#29 GeorgeWolff

GeorgeWolff

    Veteran

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 294 posts
0
Neutral

Posted 04 August 2009 - 12:23 PM

Not to my perspective - any more than undergrads with or beginning grad students. Not aware many are peer reviewers or able to generate/report/argue contrary data and opinion in scientific fora.

#30 casandra

casandra

    carpe diem by the jugulum

  • Global Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,033 posts
55
Excellent

Posted 04 August 2009 - 01:15 PM

Not to my perspective - any more than undergrads with or beginning grad students. Not aware many are peer reviewers or able to generate/report/argue contrary data and opinion in scientific fora.

Oh yeah, Mt Olympus......you tell it like it is, eh George..... :( ...I have always thought so too..but most PIs don't actually want to be challenged esp not by those they consider beneath them. Isn't this a gross violation of scientific thought?
"Oh what a beauteousness!"
- hobglobin, personal comment about my beauteous photo......




Home - About - Terms of Service - Privacy - Contact Us

©1999-2013 Protocol Online, All rights reserved.