Your feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Disclaimer: Comments submitted by third parties on this site are the sole responsibility of the individual(s) whose content is submitted. The Daily Star accepts no responsibility for the content of comment(s), including, without limitation, any error, omission or inaccuracy therein. Please note that your email address will NOT appear on the site.
Alert: If you are facing problems with posting comments, please note that you must verify your email with Disqus prior to posting a comment. follow this link to make sure your account meets the requirements. (http://bit.ly/vDisqus)
Some argue that it is better to hide this reality from the public, in order to maintain credibility.Would hiding the truth from the public really do more for scientific and academic credibility than cultivating a culture of transparency?In fact, being honest about the realities of research might enhance trust and create more space for innovation, with an informed public accepting that risk is the unavoidable and worthwhile cost of groundbreaking and broadly beneficial discoveries.Another way to ensure that academia continues to innovate in useful and relevant ways is to blur the traditional boundaries among disciplines – the frontiers where invention so often happens. Of course, the latter approach can be useful if the goal is to advance the popularity of one's own research program and to ensure that one's own ideas and perspective endure. But that is not the fundamental mission of academia.Truth and consensus are not always the same.
FOLLOW THIS ARTICLE