诺贝尔奖是否反映了当前的科学和学术价值?

J. A. Teixeira da Silva
{"title":"诺贝尔奖是否反映了当前的科学和学术价值?","authors":"J. A. Teixeira da Silva","doi":"10.14746/fped.2021.10.1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This opinion paper puts forward arguments that reflect how science’s most elite prize, the Nobel Prize may be, despite its grand stature, somewhat out of touch with the functionality of grassroots science. There is a disconnect between limited fields of study to which the prize is awarded and the interdisciplinary nature of complex research. This is the first weakness. The second limitation is the focus on a single individual, occasionally on two or three when the prize is divided, even though much research is frequently collaborative. This is particularly true in the biomedical and natural sciences, which tend to involve individuals with multiple skills, each or all of whom may be equally deserving of the Nobel Prize, given their collective participation. The Nobel Prize also tends to display poor cultural, linguistic and gender representation and/or bias. Finally, retractions of papers by select Nobel Prize laureates suggest that even these elite academics are not immune to the ills of science and academic publishing and that affect all scientists in a complex global web.","PeriodicalId":52700,"journal":{"name":"Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the Nobel Prize reflect current scientific and academic values?\",\"authors\":\"J. A. Teixeira da Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.14746/fped.2021.10.1.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This opinion paper puts forward arguments that reflect how science’s most elite prize, the Nobel Prize may be, despite its grand stature, somewhat out of touch with the functionality of grassroots science. There is a disconnect between limited fields of study to which the prize is awarded and the interdisciplinary nature of complex research. This is the first weakness. The second limitation is the focus on a single individual, occasionally on two or three when the prize is divided, even though much research is frequently collaborative. This is particularly true in the biomedical and natural sciences, which tend to involve individuals with multiple skills, each or all of whom may be equally deserving of the Nobel Prize, given their collective participation. The Nobel Prize also tends to display poor cultural, linguistic and gender representation and/or bias. Finally, retractions of papers by select Nobel Prize laureates suggest that even these elite academics are not immune to the ills of science and academic publishing and that affect all scientists in a complex global web.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52700,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14746/fped.2021.10.1.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/fped.2021.10.1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇观点论文提出的论点反映了科学界最精英的奖项——诺贝尔奖——尽管地位崇高,但可能与基层科学的功能有些脱节。该奖项授予的有限研究领域与复杂研究的跨学科性质之间存在脱节。这是第一个弱点。第二个限制是关注单个个人,当奖项分配时,偶尔会关注两个或三个,尽管许多研究经常是合作的。生物医学和自然科学尤其如此,它们往往涉及具有多种技能的个人,考虑到他们的集体参与,他们中的每一个人或所有人都可能同样值得获得诺贝尔奖。诺贝尔奖也往往表现出较差的文化、语言和性别代表性和/或偏见。最后,一些诺贝尔奖获得者撤回的论文表明,即使是这些精英学者也无法免受科学和学术出版的弊病的影响,这些弊病影响着复杂的全球网络中的所有科学家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does the Nobel Prize reflect current scientific and academic values?
This opinion paper puts forward arguments that reflect how science’s most elite prize, the Nobel Prize may be, despite its grand stature, somewhat out of touch with the functionality of grassroots science. There is a disconnect between limited fields of study to which the prize is awarded and the interdisciplinary nature of complex research. This is the first weakness. The second limitation is the focus on a single individual, occasionally on two or three when the prize is divided, even though much research is frequently collaborative. This is particularly true in the biomedical and natural sciences, which tend to involve individuals with multiple skills, each or all of whom may be equally deserving of the Nobel Prize, given their collective participation. The Nobel Prize also tends to display poor cultural, linguistic and gender representation and/or bias. Finally, retractions of papers by select Nobel Prize laureates suggest that even these elite academics are not immune to the ills of science and academic publishing and that affect all scientists in a complex global web.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信