This is the first post in a (hopefully not so) long series of posts on the subject of communication in science. Let me clarify the object of this series right away. The title is a bit provocative and I chose it because it’s catchy and simple. I don’t believe science is done badly. I believe we are doing science properly. What I have a problem with is scientific communication, both within the scientific community and outside of it.
So far, the plan of this series is to expose my views on the following topics:
1- Do young/new scientists today like using the conventional methods of scientific communication? Are those conventional tools for communication in science as effective, in the current context, as they could be?
2- Which are the particular concepts in today’s scientification that are ‘most broken’?
3- What kind of alternative could we come up with to complent and/or replace the conventional tools of communication in science?
4- What kind of hurdles would we face in undergoing such a transition? What are the objections to such a (hopefully radically) different system? (This will be a tough one for me. As you can imagine, I’m a firm believer of changing the system.)
5- How can we overcome those hurdles and make the transition to this new system?
So at least, this is the plan so far. We shall see how this series develops and what becomes of it. At least now you have an idea of what to expect.
Cheers, read on, and don’t forget to comment, I would really like to get all the input I can. This is something I’ve been maturing for a while and after this somewhat exploratory series is done, I’d like to start this project seriously and actually achieve the goals I’ll be discussing here.
If I fail, I hope I’ll at least be able to inspire someone to create something even better.
Recent Comments