Page:Sm all cc.pdf/205

 seems that these qualities are clarity of mind, a combination of imagination and caution, of receptivity and skepticism, of patience and thoroughness and of ability to finalize, of intellectual honesty, of a love of discovery of new knowledge and understanding, and of singleness of purpose. Of these the most important is the love of discovery of new knowledge and understanding. If any young readers, contemplating scientific research as a profession, do not feel this love. . . scientific research is not for them.” [Freedman, 1950]

“What can I wish to the youth of my country who devote themselves to science? Firstly, gradualness. About this most important condition of fruitful scientific work I never can speak without emotion. Gradualness, gradualness and gradualness. Learn the ABC of science before you try to ascend to its summit. Never begin the subsequent without mastering the preceding. . . Do not become the archivists of facts. Try to penetrate the secret of their occurrence, persistently search for the laws which govern them. Secondly, modesty. Never think that you already know all. However highly you are appraised, always have the courage to say of yourself – I am ignorant. Do not allow haughtiness to take you in possession. Due to that you will be obstinate where it is necessary to agree, you will refuse useful advice and friendly help, you will lose the standard of objectiveness. Thirdly, passion. Remember that science demands from a man all his life. If you had two lives that would be not enough for you. Be passionate in your work and your searchings.” [Pavlov, 1936]

These generalizations concerning characteristics of scientists are subjective, based on my and others’ personal observations. In contrast, Rushton [1988] summarizes the results of several objective statistical analyses as follows: “Scientists differed from nonscientists in showing high general intellectual curiosity at an early age and in being low in sociability. . . Eminent researchers [were]. . . more dominant, self sufficient, and motivated toward intellectual success. . . In summary, the impression that emerges of the successful research scientist is that of a person less sociable than average, serious, intelligent, aggressive, dominant, achievement oriented, and independent.”

Cooperation or Competition?
Both cooperation and competition are integral aspects of scientific interaction. Joint projects combine diverse, specialized expertise to promote research success. For many scientists, competition provides a motivation to excel. This drive to win is particularly effective for those researchers who can pace themselves, putting out a burst of extra effort on those occasions when it can make the decisive difference between being a discover and being a confirmer of others’ discoveries.

The choice between scientific cooperation and competition is a daily one, involving conscious or unconscious decisions on style of interactions with scientific peers. Most scientists simplify this decision-making by adopting a strategy that provides the decision. Perhaps the strategy is to cooperate with all other scientists; perhaps it is to compete with everyone over everything. More likely, the individual always cooperates with a few selected scientists and competes with others. Whatever viable strategy is selected, we should recognize its consequences.