Those are the first four words in Randy Olson's new book, Don't be Such a Scientist.1 I won't quote the next four words. If you want to know what they are, you'll just have to buy the book. Suffice it to say that these four words and the next few are a quote from Randy's acting teacher.
That's me. I think about problems. I collect data and analyze them. I get impatient when people3 tell stories that aren't accurate because "they make a better story". I'm a stickler for accuracy.
Unfortunately, so far as communicating with non-academics,4 that makes me pretty ineffective for a lot of reasons that Randy explains in later chapters of this book. But if you want to know what those reasons are and what I'll need to do to become more effective, you'll either have to return for later posts in this series, click through to my earlier post on the book, or click over to http://www.dontbesuchascientist.com/ and follow the review links there.
[T]hat's where this book begins -- with the realization that as an academic I had been trained to think rather than act.2
That's me. I think about problems. I collect data and analyze them. I get impatient when people3 tell stories that aren't accurate because "they make a better story". I'm a stickler for accuracy.
Unfortunately, so far as communicating with non-academics,4 that makes me pretty ineffective for a lot of reasons that Randy explains in later chapters of this book. But if you want to know what those reasons are and what I'll need to do to become more effective, you'll either have to return for later posts in this series, click through to my earlier post on the book, or click over to http://www.dontbesuchascientist.com/ and follow the review links there.
1The emphasis on "such" is intentional, but it's not explained until the end of the book. Since these posts will follow the chapters in Randy's book, you'll have to wait awhile (unless you already have the book) to see why the emphasis is there.
2Thinking too much is only one of the things that drives non-scientists and non-academics bonkers. I'm doing the other one right now. How many "normal" people do you know who like footnotes? (How many "normal" people do you know?)
3Even those who are very close to me, and even when I should know better.
4Randy's book is focused on scientists rather than academics, but every academic I've met suffers from the maladies he's diagnosed. The problem is as great for economists, historians, and artists as it is for scientists. Maybe even greater. When was the last time you heard a "normal" person speak approvingly of post-structuralism? or meet a "normal" person who even knows what post-structuralism is?
Leave a comment