Dear Colleagues, thank you very much for opinion in advance.
Regards, Shafagat
No, Selfishness is not considred as a virtue or a nessecary attribute for a scientist. sharing the knowledge and collaborations benefits the science and the scientific community. However, we can find examples that selfishness makes sense:
Many reseachers are not willing to share their experimantal data. This may be considered selfish. However, it shsould be noted that collection of experimental data is expensive and they want to keep the data to themeselves for their future publications.
Time for myself to think through many issues is needed. But this is not selfishness. I am willing to do my best, and if my co-workers contribute less than the amount I put in, I do not consider that an issue to worry about or argue about. Thanks.
"You need to have something inside to give.
While every human being starts life utterly selfish and unaware of anyone else's needs and desires, many people mature and exist at the other end of the spectrum in a state of perpetual selflessness. But people who constantly give their time, attention and energy to others often burn out or get sick..."
http://www.inc.com/christina-desmarais/why-selfishness-is-a-virtue.html
I don't think that selfishness is really a need for scientific research. It is dependent on the individual working style. For someone it may be but not for many others. However, it is also dependent on the nature of a particular person.
I don't believe so. So far, I always tried to be open. Of course, there are pros and cons. To be honest, I have faced many negative experiences in this regards. Personally, I don't bother and just be fair and honest as much as I/We can.
I do not think so. A researcher can move forward by sharing her/his knowledge with other such as what we do in ResearchGate.
Selfishness has no place in scientific research. "Selfishness" entails an intent or design for personal gain---which is subjective. Scientific research is guided by the principle of objectivity and---ultimately the outcome of scientific inquiry may be shared as knowledge-base for humanity. The misuse of scientific research, however, may be motivated by selfishness.
Selfishness may produce a successful scientist but can not produce better science.
Dear Colleagues,
Good Day,
"Are Scientists Selfish? By Meredith Salisbury | August 25, 2014
We often hear that scientists hoard data, refusing to share information even when doing so might speed advances to patients in dire need. (We touched on it briefly in this piece and it was a major element in a recent article in The New Yorker.) It’s not just about sharing results on the fly—once a project has been completed and findings published in a journal, most of us observers outside major institutions still can’t get access due to expensive subscriptions. The situation is made all the more unpalatable since most biomedical research is funded by taxpayer dollars. Yet the average taxpayer has little ability to see what comes of that funding.
So do all these factors mean we have a community of selfish scientists? The simple answer is no. The more genuine answer is: It’s complicated. The institutional inertia of the established scientific community strongly favors researchers who go along with the data-hoarding norms.
Consider the path of your typical life-science researcher, fresh out of grad school: Jane Scientist, a newly minted PhD in a sea of PhDs so vast there aren’t enough jobs for all of them. After landing a low-level gig in somebody else’s lab, she works to improve her lot by pitching in on as many projects as possible. She hopes some of them will result in a publication—the currency of advancement in science. With her name on enough papers, Jane may eventually be able to set up her own lab, where she will immediately face the challenge of having to raise money to keep that lab, because universities don’t cover that. Getting grants is linked to her publication history, since reviewers combing through five times more applications than they can fund want to make sure a winning scientist has a reputable work history. It is so difficult to win that initial grant that some funding agencies have a special piggybank just for first-timers so they don’t have to compete against established labs. Indeed, the average age at which a scientist wins her first grant in the U.S. has crept past 40. It’s not a career for the instant-gratification type.
The publish/get funding/publish again cycle will last throughout Jane Scientist’s career. If she brings in enough money to support her lab, and if she authors enough papers, and if those papers are in top-tier journals—then our friend gets a shot at tenure at her university, which offers a bit of relief from the constant panic."....
Please, see the rest of the article for more information....
http://techonomy.com/2014/08/scientists-selfish/
No, Selfishness is not considred as a virtue or a nessecary attribute for a scientist. sharing the knowledge and collaborations benefits the science and the scientific community. However, we can find examples that selfishness makes sense:
Many reseachers are not willing to share their experimantal data. This may be considered selfish. However, it shsould be noted that collection of experimental data is expensive and they want to keep the data to themeselves for their future publications.
Ideally, selfishness is not needed for the scientific research. Actually, however, selfish behavior is often observed because of competitive nature of scientific publishing. The following link gives an interesting analysis about the selfishness of scientists.
https://www.academia.edu/471267/The_Scientist_Secretive_Selfish_or_Reticent_A_Social_Network_Analysis
Both Self and forming team are important for doing excellent research.
Sharing and cooperation is needed in scientific researches. Sometimes, being a single author is beneficial.
Personality profiles are also reflected in research output, e.g. willing to share are not?
“You always have to put out to the universe what your dream is—that is in part how they become actualized.”
- Isabella Boylston
Respected R G colleagues,
After perusal of your valuable responses , I find
with the difference in words, many of us agree that there would come a tinge of selfishness or this world ( celebrated fraternity) would either make you selfish or would compel us to become selfish/ frustrated.
I attach a MAIL from the celebrated Nobel Prize winner in Physics for 2013- Dr. PETER HIGGIS[ BOSON FAME ] expressing his anguish(a few words- hope our generation will appreciate these gifted persons) about the so called SELFLESS, SELF PROCLAIMING ORIGINAL RESEARCHERS.
I earnestly request all my participating RG colleagues to plz. read his e-mail(attached )which I have always kept as a treasure.
Rgds.
Hi,
Selfishness is not needed in research but sometimes it is inevitable especially with the people who do not work hard themselves and have a lot of expectations from you.
I agree with Prof Mohamed.
Honesty and dedication are essential than the rest.
Thaku for the consideration....
I dont think that selfishness is needed for good research .
Thanks for the invitation.
I agree strongly with the views of Prof. Ahmadi-Nedushan and Prof. Banovac. Scientific research would be better, quantitatively and qualitatively, if selfishness was limited. And people would be better, from a wider point of view.
The exchange of ideas may promote science but not necessarily scientists who face sometimes problems with intellectual property rights. This would be a reason for egotistical behaviors.
It depends on nature of research work, if it is for commercial or defence purposes, selfishness is justified
I think the economic level of the country will affect the ethics of the researchers and the selfishness is one of the ethics of the researchers so we can say the research is a cooperation work in every field of the sciences.
No, I believe that the goal of science is to develop civilizations and nations, not fame and glory, selfishness stems from the love of oneself first and foremost, but generosity is your faith in love goodness for others as you love yourself.
Of course, I do not mean to give achievements to the others, but share experiences that help others to produce another achievement.
Dear Dr Mahmudova,
Yes, it is ...Eg: Nikola Tesla
Research is exhaustive , I/we try to put in our reasoning , energy and all our faculties for developing theory/concepts/contributing towards a knowledge base. Or even assuming it will generate some economical value and if people COPY/STEAL and are shameless enough to walk around as though it is theirs. I am amazed at the idea behind RE-search.
Stories: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4333627.stm
http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/status-of-gene-patents-in-canada-unresolved-despite-successful-challenge-1.2824957
Research requires Communication, which dramatically influences altruistic behavior, and appears to largely work by heightening empathy.
I support answer given by Behrouz Ahmadi-Nedushan 100%.
You should share knowledge, ideas but not the data unless otherwise you are a collaborator. Creativity differs from person to person. Sharing with others broaden the scope.
Dear Dr Mahmudova,
Humans are not necessarily evolved to cooperate with one another and we do have a selfish side given half the chance. We have a community of selfish scientists? The simple answer is no. The more genuine answer is: It’s complicated. The institutional inertia of the established scientific community strongly favours researchers who go along with the data-hoarding norms half the chance. I don't think that selfishness is really a need for scientific research. It is dependent on the individual working style. Every person have own style.
Regards,
Prem Baboo
Selfishness is not good for scientific research which is basically a team work. Being selfish may benefit someone for a short time; however cooperation is always advantageous in the long run.
Is selfishness needed for the scientific research?
Selfishness is not needed / desirable for a research success, instead of selfishness, a researcher should find way how to overcome research loneliness e.g. harnessing ResearchGate, networking etc. and constantly maintaining research alertness i.e. continuous to learn whether you are reinventing the wheel. Selfishness is not helping in knowledge contribution, in fact selfishness is thwarting knowledge contribution.
Of course no. Scientific research is always based on team work.
Let us imagine that everyone is selfish and no collaboration is practiced between researchers. This will result in no scientific progress or only limited progress be acquired.
It seems that we all agree and appreciate the value of team work, collaboration and sharing the knowledge.
Sharing the data is different from sharing knowledge. We do not call a scientist who does not share sensitive (military, medical,.etc) data selfish. Even for not sensitive data , researchers may have valid reasons for not sharing the data. Please see the reasons: why researchers are hesitate to share the data:
- Intellectual property or confitiality issues.
- Funding institute does not allow it.
- They are concerned that their research will be scooped.
- They are concerned about misinterpretation or misuse.
- Ethical concerns
- They are concerned about misinterpretation of misuse.
- They do not know where/how share the data
- Insufficient time or resources
- Lack of funding
Please see the attached infographic (from Wiley based on 2250 responses).
I you try to be happy surely you will be unhappy. By contrast, if you try to learn, or
take care of a little garden etc. as a result you will be happy.
Likewise, if your interest consists of being applauded by your work, surely your work will be poor.
Selfishness is certainly not mandatory for scientific research and at the contrary it is certainly the point you have to fight with when you want to
I agree with Shah and Barbara !
No.
The most important feature of a research that wishes to be successful in the modern Era is S H A R I N G . Sharing knowledge, sharing experiences, sharing materials and technology. We need to learn hoe to share and if possible integrate Multidisciplinary teams, if we want to proceed in Science in modern times.
Sharing is fundamental.
start a research program. So you will have to fight against some basic human instincts... In addition this will help you to overcome the loneliness related to the the way you certainly need to work. If you need to care care of the way you'll have to spread out your results - for evident financial reasons - this doesn't mean, to me, that you don't have to share the success with those who helped you to reach your target. Knowledge belongs to mankind, so just be part of it!
All the best to you all
I recommend selfishness for those who desire to be unhappy and live alone. One can accomplish something being selfish for sure, but never more than working in group.
As selfishness is about putting oneself and one's interests above those of others, I would say that it is highly counterproductive to science. Science suffers if you put your own interests above the greater good. In addition, science relies heavily on collaboration and selfishness prevents productive teamwork.
I would think of it as dedication more than selfishness after all it may be that what you are researching will benefit humanity and the greater good of all humankind selfishness is a side salad for the researcher and occurs when the result is almost achieved and the researcher or scientist is racing toward the finishing line with the reward in sight. It is easy to think of it as selfishness however it is the moment when hard work pays off and you reap the rewards of your labour
Dear Shafagat,
The very purpose of education and especially the purpose of HIGHER EDUCATION is to disseminate the knowledge that we have for the benefit of the society. If selfishness is adopted in any part of our life in our research works, it is unethical and it does not serve any purpose.
Regards.
Sekar Gopal.
Good Night,
The Selfish term from every point of view is bad, but even when the doors of knowledge close to the people around us; if you have a knack for doing things, you must learn to share and that will be the seed you left on this earth. knowledge should make us humble and science should make us better people.
Regards, dear Dr. Shafagat.
There are studies to support that common good, team work or caring for others and trying to get people to think and act interdependently failed, and even decreased motivation
No I want to submit, this is utter nonsense. If every researcher becomes selfish, and hides the new knowledge he/she discovered, how dissemination of knowledge happens? A researcher is required to work in a "team" so that multiple best brains will culminate is a finding that is useful to the society at large.
Dear Shafagat, I think that selfishness is not needed for scientific research. I think that researchers should collaborate more than hide their discoveries and it will make scientific researches more interesting and important.
Selfishness is the worst behavior in research. People should share their knowledge(with few exceptions), what will they gain by hoarding it. When someone is selfish they will never gain true research knowledge and it will not serve any purpose and their knowledge is of no use.
"Great Achievement is usually born of great sacrifice and is never the result of Selfishness" – Napoleon Hill
I have met colleagues that have been devoted to win international recognition! It is difficult to discriminate if this was a devotion or a selfishness. After the international recognition the devotion usually is converted to selfishness. What is a sure event is that if suppoese that one is a "true" scientists, then is really has a talent he may go on, otherwise he will be forgotten although he a really true scientists. These deep psychological issues are really difficult!
There is an old and related discussion of the ``ways and the means.'' By ``the ways'' here, I intend it to be understood that an agent works hard to understand/accomplish something, and generates results that change the world (possibly in a small way, like my own research! ;). By ``the means'' I intend it to be understood that the motive force behind the work above was one of many possible drives such as:
1) Curiosity/lust to understand,
2) Reaction to negative criticism,
3) Expression of Ego (`I have to do better than person X' or `I want to be remembered and need results to do that'),
4) Desire to stabilise/improve situation (`with these results, I can achieve promotion and earn enough to support family' or `with these results, the state will be satisfied, and (various people) will be safe'),
It is clear therefore that the means may be a positive or negative motive force, but that the results can still be achieved. I know some great mathematicians whose primary driving force is point 3, who actually are nice people outside of their work (`competitors on the field', as it were), and I know some whose primary driving force is 1, who can be real jerks (IMO) outside of their work (but who are kind in research!). So, I am sure it is not right for me to judge these people, ultimately.
Thus, I do not think that selfishness is absolutely required to be a good researcher. Still, this opinion reflects a specific interpretation of selfishness. If one looks at the list of means I mentioned above, almost every motive force can be interpreted as selfish (even ones like protecting family or pursuing ones curiosity), in the most broad definitions of selfishness.
On the other hand, working to try to defend/protect/support yourself or others, or `selflessly' pursuing truth to the point of hurting your health, and without any public acknowledgement also happens (if one's curiosity is sufficiently engaged), and for me, these are fundamentally positive drives (even if it can be argued that both express a selfishness).
We are all going to die, eventually. Ultimately, one has to choose how to express oneself in this universe in the time one has. The chance to act, to live bravely in the face of death, is for me a rare gift. Doing so makes a profound, poetic, and perhaps even beautiful statement.
Great achievement is usually born of great sacrifice, and is never the result of selfishness.
--- Napoleon Hill
Data sharing accelerates scientific progress because it helps find synergies and avoid repeating work
It is a very frequent argument that data sharing can enhance scientific progress.
Previous research shows that data sharing accelerates scientific progress because it helps find synergies and avoid repeating work. It is also argued that shared data increases quality assurance and makes the review process better and that it increases the networking and the exchange with other researchers. Wicherts and Bakker argue that researchers who share data commit less errors and that data sharing encourages more research.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4340811/#!po=19.7917
We need to know the fundamentals of our research area and then use our capabilities.
Can anyone tell me the method of producing the hydrophobic fumed silica/epoxy resin coating with hydrophobic features?
It depends on many criteria and we all aware of it i.e.
1. Nature of work
2. Nature of the person in case of personal work
3. Terms & conditions of the organization in case of organizational work.
4. Circumstances like standard of the society or environment
5. Law of the country
etc.
no not at all....you have to care and give respect to others only then you may win the race....
Every one is limited by capacity!
One may not be capable enough to look after every aspect of research, so may form a team to make research effective and important.
Progress in science is possible if a scientist opens up is mind and publish his results, models etc in open literature. Selfishness shall hamper the progress. However, if a person is working on some gadget, he may choose to keep his results as trade secret. But, this is not science
Knowledge is collective earnings of numerous generation of human, therefore it is a social property and selfishness decreased the growth of knowledge in the community.
selfishness is inversely proportional to the probability of being a good researcher.
Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work.
--- Vince Lombardi
Selfishness may help a scientist but not the science and scientific community. Since my childhood, I have a great respect for Marie Curie.
She was the first person to win or share two Nobel Prizes. She is one of only two people who has been awarded a Nobel Prize in two different fields, the other is Linus Pauling. As of December 2006, she remains the only woman to have won two Nobel prizes. Later, in 1935, her eldest daughter, Irène Joliot-Curie, won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry.
Marie Curie intentionally did not patent the radium isolation process, instead leaving it open so the scientific community could perform research unhindered. Just one month after accepting her 1911 Nobel Prize, Marie was hospitalized with depression and kidney trouble. Her attitude toward fame and toward her contributions to the advancement of science reveals a selflessness and an altruism that was entirely in keeping with her natural predisposition. In a sense, she could be described as a "saintly scientist."
Here is one of her quotes:
"You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful."
~ Marie Curie
Dear Colleagues,
Good Day,
"Great achievement is usually born of great sacrifice, and is never the result of selfishness."
----- Napoleon Hill
Dear all:
I think that cooperation and team work is usually much more productive and creative than individual work. Selfishness is not good for collaboration, so I don't see it as a good attitude in the research field. It may arise, however, as a defensive habit when researchers (or people from any other occupations) have to work in a low trusting environment. This kind of social scenario is not good for productiveness and it is much less satisfactory for individuals than a collaborative environment.
Dear Shafagat, what do you mean by selfishness? Working alone is not selfish, it is a method based on concentration and work schedule. Insisting on my own ideas is not selfish, it is a mater of trust in one's own findings and studies. Distrusting people is not selfish: the amount of plagiarism and stolen ideas or information or research is outstanding. Why trust others if you can do it on your own? Why share with others what you have done if those others are no going to collaborate in kind? Styles of work should not be moralized, unless you are stealing knowledge, methods or research strategies from others. Science is not the only area of research. There are many disciplines where people usually work alone. It is not good to make generalizations as to how people go about the process of research. To say that group work or collaborative endeavors are better or more ethical than working alone is not only unfair, it demeans solitary work. If you are not breaking any law, you should work as you see fit and as you please.
Group work is only productive when it is necessary. Unneeded collaboration usually slows down any process. Solitary work is also very productive, as I see from most of my colleagues. To affirm that collaborative work is more productive than solitary work is a generic affirmation that cannot be proved because each process of research has its own characteristics. I do not think such an affirmation is valid.
Best regards, Lilliana
Selfishness is not considred as a virtue or a nessecary attribute for a scientist. Good scientists:
- Share their knowledge
- Never stop learning
- Question everything and assume nothing
- Apply their knowledge for the benefit of socities, the nations and the world
- Are objective and make decisions based upon measurable and observable facts
- Give credit where it is due!
Can anyone tell me the method of producing the hydrophobic fumed silica/epoxy resin coating with hydrophobic features?
Selfishness is not good for scientists. Research is a team work and goal of a research is to publish results.
Dear Colleagues,
Good Day,
"Selfishness is the greatest curse of the human race."
----- William E. Gladstone
Selfishness is OK to the extent that you put yourself and your goals first and take care of your mind, body and soul without abusing or violating others, as you can’t achieve success and greatness in research or any other endeavour of life, if you are tired, uninspired, disturbed, annoyed or agitated.
No. You can do scientific research even outside the community and without seeking any recognition or prestige, but simply to know, to answer questions that seem interesting or important.
Dear Colleagues,
Good Day,
"It is easier to do one's duty to others than to one's self. If you do your duty to others, you are considered reliable. If you do your duty to yourself, you are considered selfish."
---- Thomas Szasz
Khan , I cannot believe you are telling this . Honestly !!!! If at all I have publications, I do not want it to be free ... Sorry
Free nope , I would rather discuss the ideas , not core details ...
Well ,no down vote now :)
The simple answer is no. The more genuine answer is: It’s complicated.
You need to be selfish to certain extent...You cannot however reveal everything that you are doing until it is published!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research