I fail to see how this is any kind of problem whatsoever, unless the externally motivated people impede the internally motivated people in such a way that negative progress is made.
> unless the externally motivated people impede the internally motivated people in such a way that negative progress is made
Is it not obvious to you that this must be the case? Every scientific field (and the set of professional researchers as a whole, I dare say) has a prevailing culture, like any other community. A scientific culture which rewards grantsmanship, bootlicking, and smoke-and-mirrors tricks is necessarily hostile to anyone who is genuinely devoted to advancing science.
Bring back Bell Labs, Xerox PARC, and their ilk. No grantsmanship, just buildings full of smart people working on whatever they like. That was the system which yielded the foundations for just about every technology you enjoy today.
Comments
I fail to see how this is any kind of problem whatsoever, unless the externally motivated people impede the internally motivated people in such a way that negative progress is made.
> unless the externally motivated people impede the internally motivated people in such a way that negative progress is made
Is it not obvious to you that this must be the case? Every scientific field (and the set of professional researchers as a whole, I dare say) has a prevailing culture, like any other community. A scientific culture which rewards grantsmanship, bootlicking, and smoke-and-mirrors tricks is necessarily hostile to anyone who is genuinely devoted to advancing science.
I was going to congratulate you on the biting neologism, but a depressing search revealed 'grantsmanship' to be a whole field of study :(
I challenge you to suggest a better system.
Bring back Bell Labs, Xerox PARC, and their ilk. No grantsmanship, just buildings full of smart people working on whatever they like. That was the system which yielded the foundations for just about every technology you enjoy today.
Bell Labs pretty much won the Netflix prize