The importance of stupidity in scientific research

Years ago in Florida, I was with my sister, watching manatees in a huge glass walled aquarium. The manatees were effortlessly floating from near the bottom of the tank to the top. I asked, "How do they do that? Do they have ballast systems like fish? How would a mammal evolve that?"<p>My sister turned to me and says, "You ask the stupidest questions!"<p>I was devastated. Only recently have I realized the truth. My sister's just not that bright. (To be fair, she's humanities/arts. Her strengths are in other areas.)

Amen.<p>As a CS guy suddenly having to do statistics (which my crypto prof called "Sadistics") 10 years after my last calc class, I completely agree that you often feel stupid.<p>OTOH, once you've felt stupid &#38; worked through it in a few areas, the rest of science suddenly feels more accessible to you. You know that you can pick up a textbook on the topic and muddle through until you know what you need.<p>My dad had to learn a good amount about electronics to build his physics experiments. To this day he's better at it than I am.

I have a sign above my desk: "If we knew what we were doing, we wouldn't call it Research" --Einstein<p>As a Ph.D. student, what was more daunting than the realization of just how much I didn't know, was the day I realized that I had more questions than I could find answers to in one lifetime...makes you feel rather...mortal.

Douglas Adams wrote "A scientist must be absolutely like a child. If he sees a thing, he must say that he sees it, whether it was what he thought he was going to see or not. See first, think later, then test. But always see first. Otherwise, you will only see what you were expecting." (in So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish)<p>I was in school when I first read that line. I showed it to a fairly well-known scientist who immediately put a copy on his office door. The smartest people I have met are also the quickest to admit they don't know.

Sounds like a perfect example of the "fixed" vs. the "growth" mindsets that Carlyn Dweck describes in her book "MindSet".<p><a href="http://mindsetonline.com/" rel="nofollow">http://mindsetonline.com/</a>

The article is pretty accurate, though I do not agree with the use of the term “stupidity”. Following is how I view the evolution of a student:<p>1. BS: This is the time when students read pre-digested information. 2. MS: They continue to read pre-digested information. In addition, they also start reading information directly from the source (papers). Also, get a brief taste of what it means to contribute to the field of knowledge 3. PhD: Students should read solely from the source (only papers). Further, it is payback time. After having benefitted from all the knowledge that others created, they are now required to produce knowledge.<p>The reason it takes research 5-7 years has nothing to do with how long it takes to answer the thesis statement. Instead it has to do with how long it takes for a student to become “mature in research”. In other words for them to understand that their job is: • Identify problems, solutions to which are relevant and challenging (the solutions can serve a purpose or can simply possess aesthetic appeal). • Create solutions and document them for everyone else to benefit from (papers and more papers) • Mentor young students to embrace research • Teach digested information with a hint of the appeal of science and research<p>Confronting a significant problem (not an incremental addition) is daunting, I would not say it makes a student look stupid. I would say it shows the opportunity and need that a field exhibits.

Reminds me of the quote by Francis Bacon which goes something like: Science is about being a blind man with a stick, and he who most persistently pokes blindly ahead of him, contributes the most to our understanding of the Universe, though only if he is willing to accept what the poking tells him that he does not want to be true.

I think the article is about ignorance, not stupidity. Ignorance is a lack of knowldedge, so it is important for research; research leads to new knowledge. Stupidity is a lack of mental ability, which will not help in research.

Feeling stupid is not a good sign. Why not switch to an area where you feel rather confident?

Thanks, best article I've read in a month.