I started “Extraterrestrial” by Avi Loeb. I am very curious about his thoughts on the interstellar object that passed through solar system a few years ago. However, the first couple of chapters (which, I guess, are setup so that we get to know Dr. Loeb) induced quite a few eye-rolls and I even had to read a few paragraphs out loud to my husband (because this Avi Loeb guy, he does not suffer from excess modesty).
I know it takes a big ego to succeed in academia (especially when it comes to, oh my, Harvard tenured position). My undergraduate advisor said something along the lines that you have to be a shark with big teeth in order to make it in academia. So I would completely expect Dr. Loeb to think very highly of himself and to have very strong opinions.
I just don’t see how all this self-praise is relevant in the context of this book.
“I sought a more creative path, one that posed greater intellectual and research challenges… I established a track record of accomplishments, both in the classroom and in military training…”
“We underwent basic infantry training, took combat courses in artillery and engineering, and were taught how to drive tanks, carry machine guns on night-long treks, and parachute out of planes. Thankfully, I was athletically fit, so the physical challenges were demanding but bearable.” – Well thank goodness you are so awesome and capable! Good for you!
“And alongside these responsibilities, I avidly embraced my academic studies…” – Yes, yes, [eyeroll] you are brilliant, we get this.
“…my PhD dissertation, which I completed when I was twenty-four...” – Yes, yes [eyeroll].
If you are wondering whether 24 is somewhat on the young side for PhD – yes, it is. Remember, he served in the army, too. Just to put things in perspective, lets take an average American individual, like me, starting college at 18 years old… BS in 4 years took me to 22 years old. Now, an average time for a PhD program is 5-6 years (at least for biological sciences in the US), so that takes us to at least 27 years old.
“[Harvard astronomy department] rarely offered tenure to junior faculty… I arrived at Harvard in 1993. Three years later, I received tenure.” – Good for you, Dr. Loeb, good for you. Thanks for rubbing it in :)
His career is impressive – no doubt there – but what does any of this have to do with the subject of the book? Why is he, again and again, providing proof of his abilities and achievements? I didn’t get this book to learn about Avi Loeb, I got it because I was curious to learn about this interstellar object!
I don’t know, maybe he’ll tie it all together, somehow. Here’s for the benefit of the doubt!
OK, enough complaining. There is a point Loeb makes early on that I think is important:
“As is true for many professions, fashionable trends and conservatism when confronting the unfamiliar are evident throughout the scientific community… fashions can discourage the consideration of certain hypotheses, and careerism can direct attention and resources toward some subjects and away from others.”
I think it is very important to understand, how much the direction research takes (be it astrophysics, biochemistry, or cancer biology) can be influenced by “fashion” or dogmatic ideas supported by influential scientists in the field. It’s not always wrong, or bad, or detrimental to scientific progress – but it could be. Publication of your papers and ability to get grants will depend on the feedback from those big-name scientists. And what if your data do not support the established way of thinking? Eventually, facts will prevail, but it would take a lot of time and a big ego on your part to push it through. Big ego, because you are going to have to push back with the big-name scientists to say no, my data are not an artefact of the experimental setup, these data are reproducible, and the problem is that the established paradigm needs to change to accommodate these new findings – I am right and you are wrong!!! It is always easier to go with the flow and to work on stuff that would support the current paradigms favored (“in fashion”) by the experts.
Dear reader, do you think a “humble scientist” is on oxymoron?