His version of Plato's grant-getter paradox reminded me more of the
supposed Islamic justification for the burning of the library of Alexandria
(I assume, by the way, that this is apocryphal and part of anti-Muslim
propaganda in Christian Europe): If it agrees with the Quran, it is
superfluous, so burn it; if it disagrees with the Quran, it is heretical,
so burn it.
It is of course a not too well-kept secret among many successful
grant-getting natural scientists (especially lab biologists, I believe)
that this year's grant proposal is written to obtain funding for the
discoveries already made this year (and so very convincing proposals can be
written!), but is then actually used to support (related, but successor)
projects for the year ahead, which will then become the basis for next
year's grant proposal.
Probably there is some aspect of a tangled time-scale hierarchy in this
clever ruse, as also some lessons about the Old School paradigm of what
constitutes valid research -- but I am laughing too much to think about
such serious matters right now! :)
JAY.
---------------------------
JAY L. LEMKE
CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
JLLBC who-is-at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
---------------------------