My PI wont follow the evidence - (Jul/29/2009 )

GeorgeWolff on Aug 4 2009, 06:08 PM said:

Sorry...I have such a "less experienced" and "less educated" mind....actually even less than less ...c'mon George, I apologise ok? I'm tired and I don't like the words ad hominem.....can we go back to the discussion please...it's good and informative....I'll cut down on the impertinence and you try to be less mean.....

I'll read again your long post and try to understand it...

I personally favor the "ideas are welcome from anyone" approach. It has served me well, both in science and in my past career in the Navy. I was very senior in the Navy -- one of the most hierarchical organizations around -- yet if the lowest E1 had a better idea of how to do something, I wanted to hear it.

The same principle operates well in a lab. I'll listen to and encourage new ideas and approaches, and maybe even allow some investigation along a new path, but --as in the Navy -- the ultimate decision (and the responsibility for the consequences of that decision) remains with me.

HomeBrew on Aug 4 2009, 07:05 PM said:

Isn't this an ideal or at least a more effective personnel management style i.e., you increase productivity by encouraging cooperation and collective effort, recognising individual contributions and not stifling initiative and resourcefulness from each member of the group?

I'm not saying that everyone's equal (not in an imperfect world) but one doesn't need to feel that s/he's just a mindless drone whose opinions don't count. If one has concerns, they shld be addressed and the person must be allowed to argue their case instead of being ignored, shut out or put down just bec as in this case, they're only techs or newly starting students. And then the PI won't even defend or at least explain his decision not to investigate a different direction, what for, why waste the time? This is probably not ejim's case and yes, we only have his side of the story but his concern is real that's why he asked those questions.

I know George doesn't like entitlement since he considers science as a kind of mental sports wherein one must be able to defend or fight for their ideas....but in this case, what? not when you're just a lowly tech or newbie in the lab? So there's no choice but to accept their lot and how to improve it without the support of the PI? Or this basic requirement of being a good team player is just a joke?

GeorgeWolff on Aug 4 2009, 06:08 PM said:

Hi George,

Read it again but I still don't get the point or at least your point...my bad. I'm too dense at times. Can you play the mentor here? If anything, it demonstrates Pauling's fallibility, no matter how great a scientist he was...but genius or rather super talent is not exclusive and great discoveries are usually due to a combination of many factors...and I'm... floundering and drowning ........so I'll read it again tomorrow...

i dont think george has a point - he's just throwing his toys out the pram

What I understand George's point to be is that the trained mind of Chargaff wasn't able to convince Pauling, so what hope in hell would an "untrained" mind of a tech have? In this regard (to use Home Brew's example), it would be better for the tech/lower sailer close their eyes and cruise blindly into the oncoming iceberg rather than to try and convince the captain otherwise. But this doesn't really say anything about the mind of the "untrained" only the arrogance of the "trained"

Or maybe I just don't get the point correctly either!

But this is exactly the point I got but he "regrets that his point is too obscure" for me.....oh well, I can always try another mind-reading......



hey dom,

speaking of making ad homs (my most-hated words) you're worse than I am....how about giving us a different perspective here...(and don't you dare throw away my barbie dolls....)

miRNA man on Aug 5 2009, 04:15 PM said:

IMO this examples shows more that scientists are not "perfect personalities" that always act 100% reasonable and guided by brain, but follow also their instincts, feelings or even moods...
The question is if a technician (or here ejim) would fit to the non-disagreeable persons. If the PI knows him long time, trusts him or they are even pals, then perhaps. If it's just one technician among others (or he just don't know him well or long enough, don't trust him, don't like him for whatever reason) then not. Independent from the tech's arguments...

Hopefully 'ad hom' free...

Now wasn't that a penetrating comment.? Really dominic- I do appreciate the depth of your thinking on this and that you've just joined the discussion. how I regret that my point was too obscure for you.

GeorgeWolff on Aug 6 2009, 05:53 AM said:

Hi George,

Let's already stop with this poking and prodding and dancing around if we want to continue with the real discussion. So what exactly was your point, if you can be more precise then perhaps we will get it and not just speculate on it....I know you always have a point altho the way you express them sometimes comes off a bit arrogantly...and then the outcome: arrogance begets arrogance....this can still be a fruitful discussion for everyone....