Almost all significant scientific progress requires paradigmatic flexibility, but the fitness function of scientific paradigms favors stability and predictable grant money yield, which in turn makes large numbers of academic employees invested in even more paradigmatic stability.
-
-
Now that you say it, it makes sense. It seems that disciplines without a clear research goal may be more prone to corruption. If we can't tell whether a "cool" paper gets us closer to the goal, that's a bad sign. (I come from structural bioinformatics - a goalless discipline)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.