A lot of scientists hate writing. Most scientists love being in the lab and doing the work and when the work is done, they are finished.
Interpretation
Scientists often prefer experimental work over the writing process that follows it.
This quote by Stephen Jay Gould highlights a common sentiment among scientists: while they are passionate about conducting experiments and being engaged in hands-on research, many find the writing and communication of their findings to be laborious and less enjoyable. It speaks to the dichotomy between the love of discovery in the lab and the often tedious task of documenting and sharing that knowledge through writing.
In practice
A scientist might use this quote in a conference to discuss the challenges of academic publishing.
The human mind delights in finding pattern—so much so that we often mistake coincidence or forced analogy for profound meaning. No other habit of thought lies so deeply within the soul of a small creature trying to make sense of a complex world not constructed for it.
Some evolutionists will protest that we are caricaturing their view of adaptation. After all, do they not admit genetic drift, allometry, and a variety of reasons for nonadaptive evolution?
Nothing is more dangerous than a dogmatic worldview - nothing more constraining, more blinding to innovation, more destructive of openness to novelty.
Wind back the tape of life to the early days of the Burgess Shale; let it play again from an identical starting point, and the chance becomes vanishingly small that anything like human intelligence would grace the replay.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
For Dawkins, evolution is a battle among genes, each seeking to make more copies of itself. Bodies are merely the places where genes aggregate for a time.
Mathematics as a science, commenced when first someone, probably a Greek, proved propositions about "any" things or about "some" things, without specifications of definite particular things.
That we can now think of no mechanism for astrology is relevant but unconvincing. No mechanism was known, for example, for continental drift when it was proposed by Wegener. Nevertheless, we see that Wegener was right, and those who objected on the grounds of unavailable mechanism were wrong.
Thanks to the discoveries of astronomers in the twentieth century, we now know that the heat death is a myth. The heat death can never happen, and there is no paradox.
It is hard to think of practical applications of the black hole. Because practical applications are so remote, many people assume we should not be interested. But this quest to understand the world is what defines us as human beings.
Half of what we know is wrong, the purpose of science is to determine which half.
Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.