Yes. I've sometimes thought, for these reasons, that true 'with-person' interdisciplinarity almost impossible. Instead, you need excellent environments to bring together specialists on interdisciplinary topics (see, @interact_minds) - BUT
-
-
Replying to @neuroconscience @Abebab and
This is limited too, as without some actual generalists, I think collaboration can only get you so far. Very tricky and little existing training, infrastructure, or incentive (grantwise, intellectually it's a pleasure)
2 replies 3 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @neuroconscience @Abebab and
I've been thinking about this issue in medicine as well. We need to be more open to changes in the structure of disciplines as we learn how they interact
1 reply 3 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @estarianne @neuroconscience and
Academia is so slow moving though.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @estarianne @neuroconscience and
Academia is most of the time stacked, too afraid to move forward, to risk the little it has.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @twitemp1 @neuroconscience and
Yes, and people like to specialize and don't like to be wrong. I've had old school neuroscientists tell me psychology isn't a thing.
3 replies 4 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @estarianne @twitemp1 and
So much this. I've been treated as if I had a dunce cap on for entertaining ideas from philosophy and phenomenology.
3 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @neuroconscience @estarianne and
At the FIL or generally? Pushing for theory is important.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @estarianne and
Generally. Folks in the FIL are usually really pilot. Karl has been a big support for my wacky philosophy/pheno ideas.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @neuroconscience @o_guest and
*polite even, dunno if they fly planes :)
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Hahahaha
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.