Difference between revisions of "Coping with Suppression of Innovative Thought"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Imported from text file) |
(Imported from text file) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
| − | Examples of censorship and suppression are widespread in academia. Great progress has come from tolerance in earth sciences; but harsh intolerance rules in social sciences, vs. natural-environmental influences, and in physics, vs. rationality and objectivity: both involve disdain for common sense. Links between skeptics' groups and establishment science. The situations in Russia and Germany. Discussion on how to cope with the intolerance.[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | + | Examples of censorship and suppression are widespread in academia. Great progress has come from tolerance in earth sciences; but harsh intolerance rules in social sciences, vs. natural-environmental influences, and in physics, vs. rationality and objectivity: both involve disdain for common sense. Links between skeptics' groups and establishment science. The situations in Russia and Germany. Discussion on how to cope with the intolerance. |
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Scientific Paper|coping suppression innovative thought]] | ||
Latest revision as of 10:11, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Coping with Suppression of Innovative Thought |
| Author(s) | James DeMeo, Neil E Munch, John E Chappell |
| Keywords | Suppression |
| Published | 1998 |
| Journal | None |
Abstract
Examples of censorship and suppression are widespread in academia. Great progress has come from tolerance in earth sciences; but harsh intolerance rules in social sciences, vs. natural-environmental influences, and in physics, vs. rationality and objectivity: both involve disdain for common sense. Links between skeptics' groups and establishment science. The situations in Russia and Germany. Discussion on how to cope with the intolerance.
