ABSTRACT
The slogan ‘Publish or perish!’, though melodramatic, sums up life for many academics from professors to research assistants. Academics are authors as a matter of necessity: appointment to a post, the successful completion of a probationary period in a new job, research income and promotion, all require evidence of published work. If there were any doubt as to the capacity of this trend to produce pernicious results, the words of Grinnell should be compulsory reading:
Modern science in the United States finds itself in the midst of a crisis. The scope of this crisis encompasses the entire scientific enterprise from its mission to its funding to the conduct of individual scientists in laboratories. How can we expect policy makers and the public to understand and respond to these issues effectively if scientists cannot reach a consensus on the principles and practices that guide research? If we don’t explain why ambiguity is inherent in the day-to-day practice of science, then we might find the practice of research restricted in ways that make creative insight far more difficult.
