A correspondent who is a distinguished and veteran Indian and international CS & IT researcher, academic and industry person passed on this article, "Honours and Numbers", http://www.epw.in/commentary/honours-and-numbers.html, published in Economic and Political Weekly issue dated December 14th 2013. The article takes a hard look at the current Indian scientific establishment. [Background for non Indian readers: CNR Rao is a leading scientist of India, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._N._R._Rao. Sachin Tendulkar is a (recently retired) leading cricketer of India, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sachin_Tendulkar. Both CNR Rao and Sachin Tendulkar were recently conferred the highest civilian award of India, the Bharat Ratna (Gem of India), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharat_Ratna.]
A main part of the correspondent's comment on the above article was: "It's high time there was more analytical thinking about Indian science. The popular press seems to thrive on handouts and personalities, rarely going beyond that to examine the case for (and against) science in India."
I did not think that such articles challenging some of the practices and statements of the Indian (top) scientific establishment ever get written (publicly) in India.
I have noted that the author has chosen to be anonymous. Perhaps that was a very wise decision! A correspondent mentioned that the reason could be to ensure that the focus was on the content and did not get distracted (from it to the author's name and personality). I think this reason makes sense (though I had not viewed it that way earlier).
Not being a scientist myself (I am an industry trained and self-taught software technologist), I have had only a spectator view, though a long and close spectator view of around a decade, of the Indian scientific and academic establishment. But, to me, this article seems to be a very courageous truth-telling article about the Indian scientific establishment. I congratulate the author for this courageous and thought-provoking article.
However, some of what the article states may be flawed or incorrect. I am not saying there are flaws or errors - I simply don't know. I don't have the in-depth exposure to and top-level view of the Indian scientific establishment to affirm the veracity of all of the article's contents. I hope this article will have a rebuttal from some appropriate person in the Indian scientific establishment so that readers can see both sides of the coin.
BTW one distinguished US academic to whom I had sent the above link found the article interesting. He expressed concern at the state of affairs where number of papers and citations are given emphasis, and also noted that Peter Higgs would have lost out in this game and lost out so badly that he would not have had the chance to make the breakthrough that he did.
For more on Peter Higgs' view of (Western) academia today please see, "Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's academic system", http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system.
Note: The Honours and Numbers article mentioned at the beginning of the post has the following reference which does not work, "2 See http: //www.geocities.corn/physics_plagiarism/ for a report on plagiarism by the vice-chancellor of an Indian university." (using .com instead of .corn also does not give the correct result). A correspondent provided this link, http://www.geocities.ws/physics_plagiarism/, which gives the correct page having details of the plagiarism as well as the list of Indian academics mostly from very well known and eminent Indian academic/scientific institutions who endorsed the webpage (Feb. 2003 seems to be the last update of the page).
A main part of the correspondent's comment on the above article was: "It's high time there was more analytical thinking about Indian science. The popular press seems to thrive on handouts and personalities, rarely going beyond that to examine the case for (and against) science in India."
I did not think that such articles challenging some of the practices and statements of the Indian (top) scientific establishment ever get written (publicly) in India.
I have noted that the author has chosen to be anonymous. Perhaps that was a very wise decision! A correspondent mentioned that the reason could be to ensure that the focus was on the content and did not get distracted (from it to the author's name and personality). I think this reason makes sense (though I had not viewed it that way earlier).
Not being a scientist myself (I am an industry trained and self-taught software technologist), I have had only a spectator view, though a long and close spectator view of around a decade, of the Indian scientific and academic establishment. But, to me, this article seems to be a very courageous truth-telling article about the Indian scientific establishment. I congratulate the author for this courageous and thought-provoking article.
However, some of what the article states may be flawed or incorrect. I am not saying there are flaws or errors - I simply don't know. I don't have the in-depth exposure to and top-level view of the Indian scientific establishment to affirm the veracity of all of the article's contents. I hope this article will have a rebuttal from some appropriate person in the Indian scientific establishment so that readers can see both sides of the coin.
BTW one distinguished US academic to whom I had sent the above link found the article interesting. He expressed concern at the state of affairs where number of papers and citations are given emphasis, and also noted that Peter Higgs would have lost out in this game and lost out so badly that he would not have had the chance to make the breakthrough that he did.
For more on Peter Higgs' view of (Western) academia today please see, "Peter Higgs: I wouldn't be productive enough for today's academic system", http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system.
Note: The Honours and Numbers article mentioned at the beginning of the post has the following reference which does not work, "2 See http: //www.geocities.corn/physics_plagiarism/ for a report on plagiarism by the vice-chancellor of an Indian university." (using .com instead of .corn also does not give the correct result). A correspondent provided this link, http://www.geocities.ws/physics_plagiarism/, which gives the correct page having details of the plagiarism as well as the list of Indian academics mostly from very well known and eminent Indian academic/scientific institutions who endorsed the webpage (Feb. 2003 seems to be the last update of the page).
No comments:
Post a Comment