“Relative Balance” during caving of knowledge & factors defining imp/less imp with utilizing of the available resources for sciences. Many Researchers are indicating that established focus angles & interest direction about digging up the knowledge is one of the limitations of sciences. Is it due to social atmosphere, benefits, current values etc or/and due to lack of more evaluated principles in sciences? Every known subject is deep inside, so digging up the knowledge is like “caving”. Now by current social environmental factors how can the whole picture come? How will this "process of caving" regarding science subjects attain some “relative balance” at important / less important direction as well? Which factors are important to define in which direction sciences need to go for further knowledge & with which expected percentage of utilizing the available resources as according to “demand of era”? Any solution please?
Good question.
Caving of knowledge by a researcher will largely depend on a number of factors:
0. Family upbringing and family support. In other words, the genesis of a successful researcher can be traces to the origins of the researcher. In addition to the influence of parents, the influence of childhood associations and relatives (aunts and uncles) tend to have a profound impact on the research potential of a person.
1. Quality of the training engaged in by a researcher, prior to starting independent research. A research can justifiably have higher success in caving, provided the supervisor for that researcher and other researchers encountered by the researcher during training shed light on cutting edge directions in the research. That is, a researcher must a good idea where to look and who to talk to at the point where independent research begins.
2. Quality of the resources available to an independent researcher, e.g., online access to the majority of mainline journals.
3. Ability of an independent researcher to decipher and detect threads (patterns) in current research that make it possible to refine, extended and improve the research topics of interest to the researcher.
Good question.
Caving of knowledge by a researcher will largely depend on a number of factors:
0. Family upbringing and family support. In other words, the genesis of a successful researcher can be traces to the origins of the researcher. In addition to the influence of parents, the influence of childhood associations and relatives (aunts and uncles) tend to have a profound impact on the research potential of a person.
1. Quality of the training engaged in by a researcher, prior to starting independent research. A research can justifiably have higher success in caving, provided the supervisor for that researcher and other researchers encountered by the researcher during training shed light on cutting edge directions in the research. That is, a researcher must a good idea where to look and who to talk to at the point where independent research begins.
2. Quality of the resources available to an independent researcher, e.g., online access to the majority of mainline journals.
3. Ability of an independent researcher to decipher and detect threads (patterns) in current research that make it possible to refine, extended and improve the research topics of interest to the researcher.
Direction of research in various disciplines of science is set by several factors including business and economic needs of the people, health hazards and other human needs of biological and social types. End to science will never come in any discipline. The DNA of human and animals carries numerous information for controlling physiological functions of the body, which are required for maintaining immunity and other physiological functions in human beings and and other mammals. In food animals such genetic signalling are needed for producing milk, meat, eggs and other useful products by animals. Each biological reaction is preceded by a chain of biological reactions and these can be manipulated by various means. So the research in biology will continue on understanding these phenomena and manipulating them to get the useful results. Let me add that these reactions will continue in positive direction in the presence of blessings of God and in the negative direction otherwise. So scientist must work with an intention to serve the people while investigating any phenomenon in biology or physics.
It still lacks the personal qualities, such as curiosity, creativity, imagination and openness to new ideas, and a lot of courage or naivety to exceed the limits of the own discipline. Stamina is also necessary.
Arno wrote "...A heaping of so many fundamental problems normally must lead to new theoretical directions."
Agreed. And there never seems to be a shortage of problems.
Philosophy of science has been changing with respect to time. Indeed, the rate of change is perhaps too high.
Relative balance can only be attained especially in medical researches when scientist takes into concideration all physio-pathologic & pharmacologic parameters to obtain a compartible implementation for social well-bieng in medical practice, anything rather than that is sensationalism. Moreover, till this moment, there's less attention to reduce intersex complex globally growing more and more because reseachers are not yet courageous to pinpoint circumstantial cause due to bad prenatal follow-up by Obstetricians lacking 'relative balance' of social well-bieng consequence in their convenient practice up-to pariturtion without interest in the responsibility assumed by Pediatrician and later involving cultural incongruency and Judiciary.
Rasheed,
It is also possible to achieve relative balance in set pattern generation. The idea of set pattern generation comes from U. Grenander during the 1990s. A distinuished set becomes pattern generator or pattern building block by choosing sets that are, in some sense, close to the generator set. With that said, you can probably guess that by defining and refining the notion of closeness, we can begin to achieve relative balance in pattern generation by restricting the acquisition of sets that belong to a particular pattern, after one chooses the generator set.
Dr. James,
My impression is that some scientific philosophy like medical Science has diversity of results considering action and reaction like Babel tower, difficult to set pattern generation like in Exact Science - mathematics, because various professional conducts are philosophic to each physio-pathology.
Dear Dr. Shidi,
Good afternoon from a sunny corner of the University of Manitoba!
From perspective, it is quite possible to generate set patterns from the diversity of results in medical science. For example, we can start by considering features of the objects of interest, e.g., amplitude, isolated in the EEG for a collection of patients. Then choose a particular EEG that we want to use for comparison, e.g., the EEG we choose might represent what is considered normal. Keep in mind that an EEG is actually a set of signal values. The let A be the EEG that is a pattern generator and
let
P(A) = {B in set of EEGs: B is descriptively close to A}
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science