Stimulating revolutionary science with mega-cash prizes.
"We argue that the most ambitious science is intrinsically riskier science, more likely to fail. It is almost always a safer career strategy for the best scientists to seek to extend knowledge more modestly and to build incrementally on existing ideas and methods. Therefore, higher rewards for success are a necessary incentive to encourage top scientists to work on the most important scientific problems, ones where the solution has potentially revolutionary implications. We suggest that mega-cash prizes (measured in tens of millions of dollars) are a suitable reward for those individuals (or institutions) whose work has triggered radically new directions in science."
As a bonus, here's a list of more awesome Charlton titles that we didn't have the space to include this week:
Why are women so intelligent? The effect of maternal IQ on childhood mortality may be a relevant evolutionary factor.Clever sillies: why high IQ people tend to be deficient in common sense.Knowledge first, critique later: Why it is a mistake for science education to encourage junior students to discuss, challenge and debate scientific knowledge.Why it is 'better' to be reliable but dumb than smart but slapdash: are intelligence (IQ) and Conscientiousness best regarded as gifts or virtues.
Are you an honest scientist? Truthfulness in science should be an iron law, not a vague aspiration.
Thanks to Bruce for today's ROFL!
