In article <l03110700b1d9870fa235@[156.111.63.53]>, Karen Lona
Allendoerfer <ka143 at columbia.edu> wrote:
> Actually, this seems to me to be the best way to simulate the real world of
> research for students. New drugs, better treatments, and true ideas, are
> not found on a curve.
New drugs and better treatments are most certainly evaluated on a curve.
It is rare that a drug is 100% effective with no side effects. New drugs
are chosen to replace existing drugs because they have higher efficacy,
fewer side effects, lower production costs, or numerous other slightly
different properties. This is most definitely a curve.
Ideas as well are evaluated on curves. Ideas are rarely absolutely
correct or immediately adopted by the greater community. Ideas get
accepted by different individuals and segments of the community (whether
the scientific community or society at large) by degress. This is also
most definitely a curve.
Curves don't weaken competition because most people still prefer to be at
the top of the class, but curves do enable a weaker student the chance to
learn and improve without concern for flunking out. If every drug that
wasn't 100% effective was never used, medicine would be sad shape. If
scientific theories that weren't adopted by 100% of the community could
never be published, science would be sad shape. Some things need extra
time.
Absolutes work only for those issues and those people who have already
succeeded.
B. Martin
