Oct 4, 2017 09:03 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ce/541863/
EXCERPT: [...] But what of the other scientists who contributed [...] “The fact that the Nobel Prize 2017 committee refuses to make group awards is causing increasingly frequent problems and giving a misleading impression of how a lot of science is actually done.”
This refrain is a familiar one. Every year, when Nobel Prizes are awarded in physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine, critics note that they are an absurd and anachronistic way of recognizing scientists for their work. Instead of honoring science, they distort its nature, rewrite its history, and overlook many of its important contributors.
There are assuredly good things about the prizes. Scientific discoveries should be recognized for the vital part they play in the human enterprise. [...] But the fact that the scientific Nobels have drawn controversy since their very inception hints at deep-rooted problems....
MORE: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ce/541863/
EXCERPT: [...] But what of the other scientists who contributed [...] “The fact that the Nobel Prize 2017 committee refuses to make group awards is causing increasingly frequent problems and giving a misleading impression of how a lot of science is actually done.”
This refrain is a familiar one. Every year, when Nobel Prizes are awarded in physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine, critics note that they are an absurd and anachronistic way of recognizing scientists for their work. Instead of honoring science, they distort its nature, rewrite its history, and overlook many of its important contributors.
There are assuredly good things about the prizes. Scientific discoveries should be recognized for the vital part they play in the human enterprise. [...] But the fact that the scientific Nobels have drawn controversy since their very inception hints at deep-rooted problems....
MORE: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...ce/541863/