Have you done any work (public writings I mean) on the malign influence of the novelty requirements in modern research supervision approvals and corresponding funding in the universities?
We've now got a system that focuses ever more closely on fabulously proliferating trivially significant (if at all?) hairs on the edges of the leaves wh…
Have you done any work (public writings I mean) on the malign influence of the novelty requirements in modern research supervision approvals and corresponding funding in the universities?
We've now got a system that focuses ever more closely on fabulously proliferating trivially significant (if at all?) hairs on the edges of the leaves while the main branches of science are ignored because "settled".
This is good for those making careers and patent profits out of the status quo but really bad for discovering errors or truths in the main branches.
Whereas the entire history of science is one of regular generational radical overturnings of the entire foundations. "The axe is laid at the root of the tree."
Ironically the insistence on novelty works to produce stasis, another name for Death.
Have you done any work (public writings I mean) on the malign influence of the novelty requirements in modern research supervision approvals and corresponding funding in the universities?
We've now got a system that focuses ever more closely on fabulously proliferating trivially significant (if at all?) hairs on the edges of the leaves while the main branches of science are ignored because "settled".
This is good for those making careers and patent profits out of the status quo but really bad for discovering errors or truths in the main branches.
Whereas the entire history of science is one of regular generational radical overturnings of the entire foundations. "The axe is laid at the root of the tree."
Ironically the insistence on novelty works to produce stasis, another name for Death.