As a professional, scientific researcher in astrophysics and philosopher, I have been observing many unfair situations in science: hard-working, talented scientists with bright and challenging ideas who get no attention and bureaucrats or administrators of science (I call them “astropolitics” within my field of research) who have no talent, have neither time nor interest to think about science, and however are visible as the most eminent scientists of our time.
I wrote
Against the Tide: A Critical Review by Scientists of How Physics and Astronomy Get Done
I learned a lot from this book, especially about areas of physics far from my field of research. It also contains many anecdotes and affairs related to closer areas within astrophysics. The descriptions of string theory research and other fields within physics seem to me similar to descriptions of a mafia or a sect.
After reading this book, I was under the impression that physics is declining and that we cannot trust much of the news about fantastic discoveries nowadays.
The recently celebrated discovery of the Higgs boson has captivated the public's imagination with the promise that it can explain the origins of everything in the universe. It's no wonder that the media refers to it grandly as the "God particle." Yet behind closed doors, physicists are admitting that there is much more to this story, and even years of gunning the Large Hadron Collider and herculean number crunching may still not lead to a deep understanding of the laws of nature. In this fascinating and eye-opening account, theoretical physicist Alexander Unzicker and science writer Sheilla Jones offer a polemic.…
A classical book on anarchy within science. I find the proposed pluralist approach as the right way to avoid the monopolies of truth in present-day science. Feyerabend identified science as an ideology, which I might have found exaggerated and difficult to understand when I started to study science, but I understand it much better now, after 30 years of working as a researcher.
Forgetting about the relativism implicit in his proposal, focusing on the sociological aspect, I think there are many good and brave observations there that can enlighten us.
Contemporary philosophy of science has paid close attention to the understanding of scientific practice, in contrast to the previous focus on scientific method. Paul Feyerabend's acclaimed work, which sparked controversy and continues to fuel fierce debate, shows the deficiencies of many widespread ideas about the nature of knowledge. He argues that the only feasible explanation of any scientific success is a historical account, and that anarchism must now replace rationalism in the theory of knowledge. This updated edition of this classic text contains a new foreword by Ian Hacking, a leading contemporary philosopher of science, who reflects on Feyerabend's life…
Apart from offering a particular perspective on cosmology and extragalactic astrophysics, the well-known heterodox astrophysicist Halton Arp offers some observations on the corruption of academic science and the difficulties scientists claiming new ideas face.
I do not think what he says about astronomy is right, but certainly his complaints on how physics and astronomy gets done contains valuable wisdom on sociology of science.
This book is a very long work: almost five thousand pages. It explains the difference between the German and American ways of doing science and why science has been in decline since Americans became leaders of scientific production. I find here a certain nostalgia for the times when Germany led scientific research in physics.
This is a good attempt to teach some rules on how to survive as a scientist under the miseries of scientific research nowadays. I agree with many of his conclusions: integrity and freedom in science are not usual in academia, and one has to be away from official centers to develop creativity and innovative dissenting ideas or otherwise suffer brainwashing, politicization, social conflict, and ostracism.
Despite its technical sophistication, scientific research often has flaws in procedure, logic, and language that undermine its value. In Essentials of Scientific Research, Devon D. Brewer covers indispensable principles and practices for conducting sound scientific research that are rarely taught or mentioned in textbooks. These frequently overlooked principles and practices are based on common sense and logic. In this book, Brewer focuses on four aspects of doing scientific research: steps and procedures common to all fields, communicating research, working and interacting with others in scientific settings, and intellectual and ethical matters. Brewer highlights the timeless nature of the Essentials with…
It is always necessary to take a critical look at the way in which scientific research actually gets done. The aim here is to gather the views of some working physicists and astronomers on the influence of the social structures of science within which scientists are obliged to carry out their research and examine the ways in which they are sometimes used in negative ways to destroy careers and hinder innovative research.
Many of the coauthors are well-known and highly reputed dissident scientists with very long experience in battles against dominant paradigms. The question is not whether somebody has correct or wrong ideas about Physics and Astronomy but whether to analyze the sociological problems to express them. Nobody should have a monopoly on the truth.
