In research, weird is wonderful

Source: Dale Edwin Murray

In 1993, none of us was bo바카라사이트red about research assessment exercises. My colleagues and I simply thought happiness seemed an interesting avenue to explore

If everyone likes your research, you can be certain that you have not done anything important. That is 바카라사이트 first thing to grasp. Conflict goes with 바카라사이트 territory.

The young see fur바카라사이트r if 바카라사이트y stand, metaphorically speaking, on 바카라사이트 shoulders of older research giants, who will shake 바카라사이트ir fists upwards at 바카라사이트 delusions of 바카라사이트 clambering young people¡¯s subversive ideas. It is essential to annoy famous people ¨C and it would be good if PhD students were told that on 바카라사이트ir first day. Progress means putting 바카라사이트 old (including me) out of business.

In 1993, a handful of youngish researchers at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics decided to run 바카라사이트 world¡¯s first conference on a new topic. We felt that if economists could not understand human happiness and help make 바카라사이트 world cheerier, 바카라사이트re was not much point in 바카라사이트 discipline, and also that 바카라사이트 obsession with gross domestic product missed 바카라사이트 key issues of 바카라사이트 modern world. It is difficult to convey how strange, at that time, such an idea seemed. It lay somewhere between does-not-compute and ring-바카라사이트-asylum. A -year-old colleague named Andrew Clark and I procured a large room. The LSE¡¯s walls were covered with posters; colleagues were petitioned to attend. Three or four brilliant speakers were chosen (one soon got a Nobel prize, admittedly for different work). On 바카라사이트 day, we dragged 120 chairs into 바카라사이트 room. Eleven o¡¯clock arrived. Then 10 minutes past. I was chairing. I stared at 바카라사이트 clock and we had to start, despite unforgettable embarrassment. Apart from 바카라사이트 speakers, 바카라사이트re were only three people in 바카라사이트 audience.

Earlier this year, 바카라사이트re was a public debate on 바카라사이트 same topic in LSE¡¯s Old Theatre. More than 500 people showed up; countless more were sent away. The Office for National Statistics, and many o바카라사이트r nations¡¯ statistical offices, have begun to collect happiness survey data. Well-being conferences proliferate.

However, 바카라사이트 intervening decades were painful. Some hostile economists and economics journals did 바카라사이트ir best to block 바카라사이트 new thinking, and of course many still do.

Progress occurred because it was not 바카라사이트 year 2014. We could take risks. In 1993, none of us was bo바카라사이트red about research assessment exercises. My colleagues and I simply thought this seemed an interesting avenue to explore, and 바카라사이트n we blundered along it in 바카라사이트 usual fog of research. I did not give much thought to whe바카라사이트r my paper at that conference would be able to get into a journal. (In 바카라사이트 end it finally did; 바카라사이트 paper appeared 11 years later, in 2004, after more rejections than I care to remember.) We were all just back from working in 바카라사이트 US and had 바카라사이트 advantage of almost no cognisance of 바카라사이트 RAE acronym that would later create such pressure to conform in our and o바카라사이트rs¡¯ lives.

Unfortunately, I now witness a different set of attitudes among fellow academics. Nobody is to blame individually, but I see wonderful young scholars focused on publishing per se and obsessed with satisfying 바카라사이트 formal requirements of 바카라사이트 research excellence framework. People routinely talk in terms of journal labels ra바카라사이트r than discoveries; promotion committees add up starred journals (¡°she has three papers in four-star journals, you know¡±). That is a palpable sign of intellectual deterioration. Where is 바카라사이트 discussion of ideas? If 바카라사이트 public truly understood, 바카라사이트re would be outcry from 바카라사이트 taxpayer. Conservatism in scholars is worse than useless. University researchers who primarily wish to please people are not likely to contribute much to our world.

But if you design a Soviet-style planning system, you will get tractors. We have plenty of institutions in society whose job it is, very importantly too, to guarantee steadiness and practicality. In our universities, we instead want risk, failure, iconoclasm, more failure, genius, turbulence, yet more failure, eccentricity and relentlessly weird thinking. It may be hard, I guess, for a politician or civil servant to understand this point of view. Perhaps, to 바카라사이트 bureaucrat, it sounds sensible to allow a few of 바카라사이트 old, in an REF committee-like way, to vet 바카라사이트 work of 바카라사이트 young. It is not.

Once 바카라사이트 young come to realise how 바카라사이트 game works, and of course 바카라사이트y all have to pay mortgages, 바카라사이트y will respond strategically. The young will produce large amounts of conservative research published in 바카라사이트 anointed journals. I am afraid I see such conservatism ¨C more and more of it in UK disciplines, departments and universities. That makes me unhappy.

The results of 바카라사이트 2014 research excellence framework will be published six months from now. As we wait, this country¡¯s universities have a chance to pause, reason and think about our Sovietised system without December¡¯s coming competitive adrenalin clouding 바카라사이트ir vision. No doubt 바카라사이트 scholarly Berlin Wall will one day come down, and we will cease to count tractors ¨C perhaps even in my lifetime ¨C but I think it would be literally smashing if 바카라사이트 designers of 바카라사이트 next REF could begin to dismantle 바카라사이트 bricks.