I must commend him for ably cloaking himself in the prestige of a scientific field without wasting his time publishing p-hacked fMRI studies and toiling away in academic indentured servitude. I just hope that society as a whole can follow his noble example and convert the deadweight loss of wasting time at universities into a pure bidding war for prestige.
Reminds me of Neal Degrasse Tyson, billed as an astrophysicist, whose contributions to the field have been miniscule since completing his doctorate. I guess one could argue that popularizers invest their time in communication rather than research, and there's something to that ... although that didn't stop Carl Sagan.
Interesting analysis of publications by Sam Harris which are pretty miniscule. As a research scientist for over 35 years in the field of Earth Science who published over 200 peer-review papers, the first thing I do when I come across "scientists" in any field, particularly those in high profile positions, is to check their publication record. And in so doing, I am amazed at the high percentage of "failed scientists" or scientists who have achieved very little who have been installed into positions of power and influence. Could it be that loyalty and corruptibility are valued more highly than scientific integrity and scientific achievement?
I don't think I have ever heard/read him refer to himself as a neuroscientist. It's not a moniker he seems to wear very explicitly. I think the bios that say "neuroscientist" are just refering to the fact that he has a PhD.
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." (2Tim 4:3-4)
I must commend him for ably cloaking himself in the prestige of a scientific field without wasting his time publishing p-hacked fMRI studies and toiling away in academic indentured servitude. I just hope that society as a whole can follow his noble example and convert the deadweight loss of wasting time at universities into a pure bidding war for prestige.
Reminds me of Neal Degrasse Tyson, billed as an astrophysicist, whose contributions to the field have been miniscule since completing his doctorate. I guess one could argue that popularizers invest their time in communication rather than research, and there's something to that ... although that didn't stop Carl Sagan.
Interesting analysis of publications by Sam Harris which are pretty miniscule. As a research scientist for over 35 years in the field of Earth Science who published over 200 peer-review papers, the first thing I do when I come across "scientists" in any field, particularly those in high profile positions, is to check their publication record. And in so doing, I am amazed at the high percentage of "failed scientists" or scientists who have achieved very little who have been installed into positions of power and influence. Could it be that loyalty and corruptibility are valued more highly than scientific integrity and scientific achievement?
The philosopher Jerry Fodor has a nice little essay on the pointlessness of this sort of neural imaging research.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v21/n19/jerry-fodor/diary
I don't think I have ever heard/read him refer to himself as a neuroscientist. It's not a moniker he seems to wear very explicitly. I think the bios that say "neuroscientist" are just refering to the fact that he has a PhD.
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." (2Tim 4:3-4)