I don´t want to come into the polemics, but i would like to make a side point about the changes in the usual academic dynamics with the advent of professional blogs (like this one) internet forums etc.
Is not the review system obsolete?
When an scholar put his work on internet to be visualized by all then there is no need to other scholars to opine, just only the whole society.
The academic world as a whole has its own conflict of interests and often valid scholars are rejected and more ortodox, but flawed scholars, prevail due to favorable and self-perpetuated reviews.
And the academy works like a school of fish by imitation.
A bad review can ruin a career and a good one can sparks it.
This idea, in a more refined way, is found in Taleb´s book "Black Swan" and i agree with him.
Interesting issue, Anibal! I don't know Black Swan (maybe I should look at it!), but I partly agree with you. The peer review system does have the flaws you describe, but a completely open, unreviewed system also has flaws. I'm inclined to think a balance of the two is ideal, with more emphasis on open, unreviewed contributions than is currently given.
I don´t want to come into the polemics, but i would like to make a side point about the changes in the usual academic dynamics with the advent of professional blogs (like this one) internet forums etc.
ReplyDeleteIs not the review system obsolete?
When an scholar put his work on internet to be visualized by all then there is no need to other scholars to opine, just only the whole society.
The academic world as a whole has its own conflict of interests and often valid scholars are rejected and more ortodox, but flawed scholars, prevail due to favorable and self-perpetuated reviews.
And the academy works like a school of fish by imitation.
A bad review can ruin a career and a good one can sparks it.
This idea, in a more refined way, is found in Taleb´s book "Black Swan" and i agree with him.
Interesting issue, Anibal! I don't know Black Swan (maybe I should look at it!), but I partly agree with you. The peer review system does have the flaws you describe, but a completely open, unreviewed system also has flaws. I'm inclined to think a balance of the two is ideal, with more emphasis on open, unreviewed contributions than is currently given.
ReplyDelete