Dear Friends,
I am sure no scientist such as Copernicus, Kepler or Galileo bribed anyone to validate their discoveries that exposed 2300-year-old flawed belief (e.g. the Earth is static at centre) at the root and very foundation of then dominant paradigm (i.e. in 16th century) later referred to as geocentric paradigm or paradox.
But today research community expect me to bribe them or someone influential to get endorsement for my new discovery that exposes 50 to 60-year-old flawed beliefs (e.g. about components and CBD/CBE) at the root and very foundation of existing dominant paradigm for software engineering. Please refer to attached PDF for my discoveries that expose the flawed beliefs.
I never heard that any researcher ever paid bribe for investigation proof for getting endorsement for his discovery or theory, even in case of very complex and disruptive discoveries or theories by researchers such as a junior patent clerk (I.e. Einstein), Newton, Plank, Maxwell or Darwin.
Such discoveries or theories require investing many months of time and money for investigating evidence, facts and reasoning. Research community gladly investigated the evidence, facts and reasoning, without expecting any bribe or favours. It is the sacred duty of any researcher or scientist to investigate such new discoveries or theories. The scientific method requires publishing each new discovery or theory openly backed by evidence, facts and reasoning.
The scientific method requires other researchers and scientists to investigate the proof backed by evidence, facts and reasoning. They can reject such discovery or theory only by finding a flaw in the proof, evidence, facts or reasoning. Only an incompetent scientist or researcher rejects a new discovery based on his pre-connived notions or prejudice without looking at the evidence and facts.
Any researcher is only obligated to provide proof backed by evidence, observable facts and reasoning publicly. It is the moral and ethical obligation of the research community (having expertise in relevant domains) to validate the proof. It is humiliating to beg researchers to investigate the proof and being snubbed. Unfortunately, since no one in computer science is willing to fulfil their moral duty to investigate proof for a new discovery, I feel that I left with no other option but bribing scientists and researchers of software to investigate the proof for my discovery.
Isn’t is demeaning, if not unethical, to pay (or expect) money to get (or give) endorsement for a new discovery. The scientific process or method requires openly publish proof for such discovery backed by evidence, observable facts and reasoning. It is the duty of the members of research community to investigate the proof.
I feel, it is my moral duty and obligation to investigate such proofs for any new discovery (of another researcher), if the domain of the discovery and its proof are within the reach or realm of my expertise.
Often disruptive discoveries in any domain would be outside of the existing knowledge base of the domain but would be within the reach of experts in the domains but requires putting more effort to stretch to expand the boundaries to reach the new discovery. But discoveries in physics, chemistry or biological sciences are not in my realm of my expertise.
For example, I am qualified to validate proofs in software engineering domain, which includes even a disruptive discovery that is outside the boundaries and/or contradictory to existing BoK (Body of Knowledge). I will not abdicate my duty to investigate proof for new discoveries for expanding our boundaries of BoK (or to uphold the Truth) and is it wrong to expect other researchers to do the same (i.e. not abdicate their duty for the cause of expanding BoK or upholding the Truth)?
Best Regards,
Raju Chiluvuri
Dear Friends,
The scientific research is a noble non-profit profession for expanding the boundaries of mankind’s knowledge, for example by (i) acquiring new valid knowledge (e.g. discovering new facts or theories) and (ii) pursuit of objective truth that includes upholding the Truth by eliminating flaws or imperfections in existing BoK (body of knowledge).
I can’t find an example that any researcher in history paid money to validate or get endorsement for his discovery. Isn't it pathetic, if researchers at universities or government funded research institutions feel that each researcher (who made a new discovery) is obligated to get endorsement by paying money to someone influential.
It is moral and ethical obligation of every scientist to investigate proofs (backed by new facts, evidence and reasoning) discoveries of new theories or facts. It is also moral and ethical obligation of every scientist to uphold the truth by investigating or discoveries of facts or evidence that expose basic flaws or imperfections in existing body of knowledge.
It is my moral duty to validate the proof, if I am qualified to investigate the proof for a new discovery. It would be suspicious and feel offended for offering bribe, if any one offered me money to endorse his discovery.
Isn’t it a bribe, if anyone expects/takes money for doing things that he is morally obligated do? Offering money for validating a new discovery raises serious doubts about the integrity of the researcher and his discovery.
Best Regards,
Raju
Publication fees exacted by predatory journals are like a bribe that must be paid or, alternatively, like extortion by the journal.
Dear Dr. Pfeifer,
It is well documented in History, nationalism and national pride played major role in promoting new ideas, theories and discoveries and scientists made them between 17th and 19th century in the western European nations. Research communities in each of the nations made efforts to rigorously debated and discussed proposal of every possible discovery or theory, for example, in forums or societies such as Royal Society of London. Such societies acted as incubator of new theories to form and provided healthy debate and feedback for promising discoveries to flourish.
In general, I agree with you that it is a bribe. But I feel, in certain cases, it is not a bribe, if such journals are non-profit but created to provide a small forum or society for each specialized domain. The purpose of the society or forum is to provide healthy environment for debate and discussion for exploring new frontiers to incubate new theories and to grow for reasonable fee, if such forum requires money to create and sustain.
For example, Royal Society of London was incubator for ideas such as Gravity. Robert Hooke proposed idea of Gravity nearly 20 years earlier than Newton, but Newton provided mathematical proof for inverse square law.
I feel, our scientific knowledge could expand much faster, if we can create small online communities, where each community is targeted at addressing particular and small aspect or issue. It must provide healthy environment for debate and explore various new assumptions for incubating new theories, where promising theories can grow (as long as they can’t be falsified) and other theories that fail rigorous validation would be quickly discarded.
Another example for such society I knew was Homebrew Computer Club in Silicon Valley that incubated new ideas at that time, when it was small non-profit and promoted healthy debate between enthusiasts having pure passion (before it was captured by parasites for profit): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homebrew_Computer_Club
Best Regards,
Raju
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Computer Science