Advice to a Young Scientist

AdviceToYoungScientistSuggested by John C. Lennox • Sir Peter Medawar, Nobel laureate, deflates the myths of invincibility, superiority, and genius; instead, he demonstrates it is common sense and an inquiring mind that are essential to the scientist’s calling. He deflates the myths surrounding scientists—invincibility, superiority, and genius.
Buy at Amazon.com
Suggest a book • (793 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Bookshelf. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Advice to a Young Scientist

  1. David Ray says:

    This one’s not in my local library, damn it, so I’m off to Amazon yet one more time.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I might check that one out as well, David. It seems that there is very little wisdom being passed on from one generation to the next. I contend that simply doing an end-run around wisdom by putting one’s eggs in the basket of libertarianism or Progressivism isn’t a good substitute. Ignorance merely transferred to the trappings of various feel-good words that pretend at a higher ideology isn’t a substitute for wisdom.

      I was thinking of this issue this morning when Mr. Kung sent me a link to this article by Kevin Williamson which talks about the abuses of the military-style police: Meet the New Serfs: You.

      You’ll find all kinds of libertarians pontificating on that thread. But few will point out that their support for Progressive causes is a large part of the problem. If there are to be no limits on human behavior, then how does one expect one to suddenly find limits on one’s behavior if one is in a position of authority and public trust?

      Yutes may now call themselves “libertarians,” but being ungrounded in wisdom, by any other name, is still the same. And from what I can see from this book, it is an attempt to pass on the proper and sane culture of science to generations who have become ungrounded in wisdom and reasonableness. No wonder a bunch of religious Atheistic kooks now dominate so much of science.

      Additional:

      On the other hand, maybe it’s just full of politically correct clap-trap. I found the book online here. Here’s just one sentence from it:

      The idea that women are, and are to be expected to be, constitutionally different from men in scientific ability is a cozy domestic form of racism

      .

      Remember, it was John Lennox who recommend this book, not me. Men are simply better at math and logic because they are, not because of sexism.

      Anyway, I’ve changed my mind on this book and will let you, David, be the guinea pig. 😀 If Lennox likes it, I’m sure it’s full of good advice. But, good god, how could someone write something as stupid as the above? That’s Cultural Marxism, the denial of any difference between men and women. And under that paradigm, if the sexes (or races) aren’t exactly proportioned, it’s said to be a sign of racism, sexism, etc. And this is all complete hogwash.

      If the bulk of the book is like this, it might better be called. “How to destroy the natural curiosity of a scientist by filling his head with a bunch of unfounded political nonsense.”

      • David Ray says:

        Men do edge women out in the sciences as Larry Summers of Harvard also observed. Then the feminists let Summers know what it’s like to feel like a college Republican after he made that statement. (I almost felt sorry for him.)

        As for the author’s idiotic statement, I also glean the “jewels” from a book while holding my nose on the pitfalls. It’s what I call the Tim Lane approach. (Also I employ a red, green & yellow highlighter for such parts. red = stop/contradiction. green = go/confirmation. yellow = simple areas of note.)

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          You’re going to have to be holding your nose so much, I might have to buy you some Breath Right strips. Let me know how it goes.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        My understanding is that men do slightly better at math and science, women in languages. Also, men have a different bell curve, stronger at the extremes. Thus, you get more extremely stupid men than women, but also more brilliant ones.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Men are extremely better than women at math. And it takes strange ideologies such as quoted in the above to try to make “equality” work out. There are more women nurses too. Should we say that hospital administrators are sexists because of this? And as Thomas Sowell points out in “Race and Culture,” there are by far more German brewers. Should we thus come down hard on the Germans for “excluding” others? Or perhaps is there more to how societies and people naturally align themselves other than racism and sexism?

          This is the wacky world of Cultural Marxism where equality-of-result is just assumed and anything that falls short is deemed the result of racism or sexism or some other ism. And for this book to cave into this aspect while supposing to offer “Advice to a Young Scientist” is barbarically blind and stupid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *