Re:Cathedrals, Bazaars, and in Between
by dalke on Monday January 05, 2015 @04:35PM
(#8841346)
"a single scientist on the panel interrupted ..."
The response from the other panelist wasn't going to be the correct one, which is "Duh! Not helpful!"
Is that scientist making the claim based on evidence, or based on personal belief? If so, what is the evidence?
Do we train everyone to think the same way? Do we train them to think about problems in specific areas? Do we train them to think about historical problems? Would improved knowledge of the literature help identify unexplored paths, and keep students from revisiting old, well-trodden paths, or should some old things be left mostly unvisited?
The response from the other panelist wasn't going to be the correct one, which is "Duh! Not helpful!"
Is that scientist making the claim based on evidence, or based on personal belief? If so, what is the evidence?
Do we train everyone to think the same way? Do we train them to think about problems in specific areas? Do we train them to think about historical problems? Would improved knowledge of the literature help identify unexplored paths, and keep students from revisiting old, well-trodden paths, or should some old things be left mostly unvisited?