In 1986 the (now late) Richard Hamming gave a talk entitled "You and Your Research" at Bellcore (Bell Communications Research). There's much to admire in what he said, not least being his charming self-deprecation. But the speech also raises some rather debatable questions, and implicitly assumes that many of the answers are obvious. These issues deserve thought:
- Where's the dividing line between self-confidence and megalomania?
- To what degree should one's lifestyle "conform" (or appear to conform) to social norms, in order to avoid wasting energy on unimportant conflicts?
- What's the trade-off between helping other people and doing great individual research?
- How much work should one devote to solving specific problems, versus attempting to abstract and generalize so as to solve a whole set of problems in one blow?
- To what degree must one neglect one's family (and/or other responsibilities) in order to do outstanding science?
- How much effort should one spend on communicating (aka "marketing") one's results?
- Is it productive to schedule "Great Thoughts Time" for perhaps half a day a week, and thereby fence off ~10% of one's time to wrestle with big problems? (Is this too little or too much?)
- Does social crisis (e.g, World War II) make for a stronger, more courageous generation than arises in peaceful times?
- Must one change fields every 7-10 years in order to stay fresh and productive?
- Is being a great scientist (i.e., doing great research) an appropriate chief purpose for one's life? (Hamming gives a nod in the direction of doing "significant things" in other fields; the same question applies to that.)
Thursday, September 07, 2000 at 07:13:23 (EDT) = 2000-09-07
TopicScience - TopicProfiles
(correlates: BossJobs, QuidConducere, ExpertPlayer, ...)
![[Home]](/images/zh.gif)