What happens when 2 of your colleagues think they are Demi-Gods?? Not only do they think so, they are also treated so by some. They talk like they own the scientific world. I agree there is scientific rationale behind the questions they ask.. but somehow, some where the manner in which the questions are asked transcend from being just out of scientific curiosity to getting personal. When you're asked to critique a paper, is it okay for you to doubt and assume that the scientific credibility of the researcher is a whole load of crap?? And how does it fit if it's your own peer? Even as a neutral person watching this kinda treatment meted out from one 1 peer to the other, I'm getting weirdly uncomfortable. It's okay to give critical feedback, but it needs to be done in a professional manner. Yes, you're asking out of professional/scientific curiosity but it DOES get personal, if not to you, definitely to the researcher whose work you're beating the crap out of...
Professionalism.. that's what this whole thing lacks... my 2 cents..
Professionalism.. that's what this whole thing lacks... my 2 cents..
No comments:
Post a Comment