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.”
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.
Thanks to Bruce for today’s ROFL!