Nullius in Verba

In this episode, we discuss scientific snobbery and the ways in which it affects our interactions with and perceptions of other scientists. What are the reasons for hierarchies among different disciplines, institutions, and approaches to science? What are some ways in which snobbery manifests in science? And is it snobby to not want to present scientific posters? Enjoy.    Shownotes:  Ego and Math (3Blue1Brown) M. V. Berry; Regular and irregular motion. AIP Conf. Proc. 15 September 1978; 46 (1): 16–120. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.31417  

Discussions on the replication crisis in social psychology, historical crises, concerns about negative consequences, publishing replications, the impact of statistical advances and computer technology on data manipulation, the importance of taking action and better science, relevance and real-world consequences

Reading of the chapter "Investigator Data Analysis Effect" from the book: Barber, T. X. (1976). Pitfalls in Human Research: Ten Pivotal Points. Pergamon Press.

This podcast explores the replication crisis in psychology, discussing key events such as Daryl Bem's precognition studies and the False Positive Psychology paper. The hosts share personal anecdotes and discuss the concept of crisis, controversial papers, data analysis methods, unethical research practices, and the Reproducibility Project's impact.

In this episode we reflect on the role of intelligence in scientist. How much does intelligence matter in science, and which other characteristics might play a role in doing good science? Do scientist need to be extremely intelligent or can anyone do science? And what is the role of stupidity in science?  Capax Mentis roughly translates to "capacity of mind." Smriti stupidly messed up her audio so the quality isn't great. Apologies!    Shownotes Schwartz, M. A. (2008). The importance of stupidity in scientific research. Journal of Cell Science, 121(11), 1771. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.033340 Bernal, J. D. (1939). The Social Function Of Science. Routledge. Paul Medawar: Advice to a Young Scientist  Feynman talking about the uncomfortable feeling of confusion   A good scientist always keeps learning – Nobel Laureate Peter Doherty  Flatland (1884) by Edwin Abbott Abbott  A zero-order correlation simply refers to the correlation between two variables (i.e., the independent and dependent variable) without controlling for the influence of any other variables. Essentially, this means that a zero-order correlation is the same thing as a Pearson correlation.

As prologue to the next episode on how smart one needs to be to be a scientist, we present a reading of chapter 2 "How can I tell if I am cut out to be a scientific research worker?" by Peter B. Medawar from his 1979 book 'Advice to a young scientist'. Our next episode was inspired by the section "Am I brainy enough to be a scientist?" https://www.google.nl/books/edition/Advice_To_A_Young_Scientist/3fg3DgAAQBAJ

In this episode we discuss Daniel Dennett's distinction between chess, or research worth doing, and 'chmess,'  research not worth doing. We discuss ways to determine whether our research is chess or chmess, and how to avoid being sucked into lines of research we don't particularly care about.    Shownotes Dennett, D. C. (2006). Higher-order truths about chmess. Topoi, 25, 39–41. Dunnette, M. D. (1966). Fads, fashions, and folderol in psychology. American Psychologist, 21(4), 343. Folderol means 'a useless ornament or accessory', and is used to indicate something is 'nonsense'.  Dweck, C. S. (2022). Mindsets: From bathtubs to hot beliefs to social change. In Kassin, S. (Ed.) Pillars of Social Psychology: Stories and Retrospectives, 213–219. Cambridge University Press.  The Kardashian Index    

As prologue to the next episode on Chmess, we present a reading of a paper by Daniel C. Dennett:  Dennett, D. C. (2006). Higher-order truths about chmess. Topoi, 25, 39–41.

In today's episode, we discuss vocational virtues⸺scientific principles that should guide the behavior of scientists. We discuss whether we agree with values put forth by numerous scientists, including Ivan Pavlov, Peter Medawar, Santiago Ramón y Cajal, Barry Schwartz, among others, and share our own.    Correction: At 56:24, Smriti mentions the book This is Biology, which is written by Ernst Mayr, not E.O. Wilson.    Shownotes Pavlov, I. (1936). Bequest of Pavlov to the Academic Youth of His Country. Science, 83(2155), 369–370. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.83.2155.369 Schwartz, B. (2022). Science, scholarship, and intellectual virtues: A guide to what higher education should be like. Journal of Moral Education, 51(1), 61-72. Robert T. Pennock: An Instinct for Truth: Curiosity and the Moral Character of Science Merton, R. K. (1942). A Note on Science and Democracy. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1, 115–126. Schwartz, B. (1990). The creation and destruction of value. American Psychologist, 45(1), 7. Paul Medawar: Advice to a Young Scientist  Ernst Mayr. This is Biology Santiago Ramón y Cajal: Advice for a Young Investigator Bernal, J. D. (1939). The Social Function Of Science. Routledge.  Weber, M. (1917/1958). Science as a Vocation. Daedalus, 87(1), 111–134. E.O. Wilson: Letters to a Young Scientist

As prologue to the next episode on vocational virtues, we present a reading of a paper by Barry Schwartz:  Schwartz, B. (2022). Science, scholarship, and intellectual virtues: A guide to what higher education should be like. Journal of Moral Education, 51(1), 61-72.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2020.1772211  (Published online: 19 Jun 2020) You can read the paper here.  An episode from Smriti's previous podcast with Paul Connor where they discussed the paper with Barry can be found here.