Is The Mad Scientist Image True?

It's a relatively safe bet that the scientist in your head is sitting somewhere in front of some very intimidating looking equipment, researching as hard as they can.

Looking back at history you can see that many of the greatest scientific mindstended to work mostly in isolation or, at most, with a few indentured graduate students. So, the "lone genius" model of scientific progress has historical justification, right? Well maybe not.

Newton looked down on his contemporaries (while suspecting them of stealing his work) but regularly communicated with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who was also working on the development of calculus. Maxwell studied at several prestigious institutions and interacted with many intelligent people. Even Einstein made the majority of his groundbreaking discoveries while surrounded by people with whom he famously used as sounding boards. So if this myth has little basis in reality, why do people still believe it?

Science doesn't happen in a vacuum (unless your experiment requires vacuum conditions). The whole philosophy of scientific investigation requires every idea to go through validation and scrutiny by many scientists. Anything that passes through the fire of criticism from other scientists comes out the other side a vastly improved product.

So what can be done? Everyone in this scenario has some responsibility to enact change. The scientists have an obligation to present their results in a manner that's not cloaked behind impenetrable (to anyone but them) jargon, theories, and paywalls. Particularly in a society in which science is publicly funded, it is the duty of researchers receiving that money to ensure that science can be understood by everyone. 

On the other side, the public has an obligation to consider the reliability of any opinions they read. In this way, discussions can be had which are well-informed and can further lead to the improvement of the final results. 

It's important to make science accessible so that the perception of the "hero scientist" does not cause widespread harm to the results as a whole

sciencealert.com 12/8/17

KEN CLARK, THE CONVERSATION 

6 DEC 2017