No doubt good quality publications in reputed journals is a leading criterion to establish and judge a scientist/professor. For many of the field oriented professions when he or she is compelled to put majority of time & efforts to conceive , create, manage and generate ground truth data/observations/R&D; publication remained dragged off; even though having better & deeper knowledge/information/data with them. How to correlate or rate these two brains/professionals ? Its a big issue with which generation is willing to sit in comfort zone (walls of institution) and get publish using secondary data & secondary philosophy; rather than coming on real ground, reacting with end clients , generating primary information and than shaping philosophy & publications.
I still think and hope that community here may put their views on this simple looking common question
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy