I’d argue that the burst of activity triggered by Covid was at least partly due to a “paradigm effect” rather than importance/social good. Many recognized that a huge natural experiment was underway and would paradigmatically reframe everything we thought we knew in many fields.
-
Show this thread
-
I’m not actually a big fan of Kuhnian paradigm shift model, but I think it applies here to first order (I’m more in the Feyerabend methodological anarchy camp). Basically good researchers don’t work on what’s “important” but on what they have a promising attack for.
4 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Unless you define “important” the way Hamming did. The problem with all programmatic top-down efforts to “start a new field” is that they tend to go after important in the wrong outsider sense flagged by Hamming here. https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/YouAndYourResearch.html …pic.twitter.com/47IUeLNUzC
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
It’s not actually possible to drive planned roadmaps at any useful level of detail below say “go to the moon” and allocating Apollo level budgets. Below that, you gotta pour fuel on emerging paradigm sparks, not force “research time travel” down people’s throats with money/funds.
1 reply 1 retweet 14 likesShow this thread -
This is one reason I’m a skeptic of Progress Studies type thinking. Appeals to economists and billionaires but rests on an illusion of methodological legibility and governability that the history of science casts serious doubt on.
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
surely a serious inquiry into "what drives progress in science/technology" can discover that the answer is "stuff you can't replicate on purpose"? I think at least some of the people working on Progress Studies are honest enough to report "null" results like that.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @s_r_constantin
It’s a bit besides the point whether they do. Like reporting failure looking for ghosts. They’re free to study whatever but I personally invest attention (since I can’t invest money) on things with a “have an attack” premise. Eg. SpaceX $10/kg to LEO is a paradigm bet.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
-
Replying to @vgr
ah. without reason to believe you have a lead on something good, doing a broad search is kinda depressing and unmotivating. I do share that attitude...but it's a wonder anyone else who feels that way can stomach social science!!
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
works of synthesis are super important, and there are ideas hidden in the crevices of the mainstream advances, some important the problem is that there is no work product, that is valued one of the reasons I love YouTube creators, they show learning effort and resourcefulness
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
