A New Vision for Science: Balancing Stakeholders and Fostering Collaboration

Hi AuburnPanda, I am doing exactly what you are proposing. If you want to take a look see the following website [https://www.qbri.org]

Kind regards
Dr Keryn Johnson PhD MSc BSc
Quantum Biology Research Institute
+64221998782

Marat Smirnov I very much agree that a new way to encourage collaboration would be very beneficial. It has to be something more than just workshops bringing people together. Thank you for your proposals in this direction.

quote
This essay presents a critical response to the current scientific landscape, which is characterized by the influence of various stakeholders, leading to an unsustainable, ineffective, and expensive model of scientific research. To address these issues, the essay argues that by promoting collaboration and transparency and modifying the balance of power among stakeholders, a more equitable, effective, and sustainable scientific landscape can be created.
end of quote
I have a different take. We see stake holders because some of the research priorities to be finalized are so hard to do. Case in point, the HIGGS BOSON. For decades this was the Ahab, and the great While Whale hunt and it took DECADES before Dr. Higg's model being examined in CERN lead to its celebrated findings. Even now. there are Higgs hunting safaris as to if the Higgs is standard Model derived, or exotic physics.
However there is yet another worrisome trend. In the early 1990s Bill Clinton killed the Texas based super collider, which would have rivaled CERN. This super collider would have had benefits as far as a check and contrast to CERN. In the sake of at times insane economizing, we are in many scientific mega projects building stand alone giant facilities with their intricate research hierarchies.
In a word, the bloat in this is in huge facilities like CERN with few rivals as to cross checking. As an example the Fermi data sets hinted directly at the Higgs, but when Fermi was partly decommissioned, it took YEARS before some of the signal analysis of the signals were dredged up as a partial comparison as to the Higgs experiment in CERN.
Needless to say, overly centralized facilities, with few rivals, are ALSO a problem area which needs to be addressed

Andrew Beckwith when its their turn to take their place at the oars.
They will be fewer
And even more burdened
with the demands of others
The greater the prize
tHE GREATER THE COMPETITION
aND NO ONE
cAN AFFORD THE LOSS.
The lure of expensive toys
Instead of cleared eyed pursuit
Of the counterfactual
And the salaries
Of grad students
And adjunct professors
Meanwhile your world is burning around you
And you must ask yourself
This question:
"Why
Am I standing around
doing nothing?"
({Probably doesn't apply to you.
I'm sure you are
Privatized goals of environmental effectiveness
The- studied disinterest in measuring the true costs and true benefits
A profession whom
every few years
is forced
to demonstrate
the limits
of its competence.

Marat Smirnov Hello, AuburnPanda. I like that you, among only a very few contestants afaict, have directly addressed organizational issues. Theorizing about how "science" should or might change, is just an imaginative excercise lacking in a plan of action, unless one addressed these issues. Indeed, in calling for more interdisciplinary cooperation and collaboration, you are yourself in effect, acting as a managerial consultant talking to scientists. (Regarding the nature of the essay per se, not WRT how many of the readers are necessarily "scientists" per se here.)

Also, would you (and anyone reading this) please take a look at my essay too, which attempts to disprove AI reductionism about minds. I use both a philosophical argument about existential knowledge (a sort of update of Descartes famous experiment) plus inferences from quantum mechanics. Thanks, and rem. again: this is the last day to rate essays!