The Forgotten Half of Scientific Thinking. Scheffer, M. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(17):6119, April, 2014. doi abstract bibtex [Excerpt] Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2). Although the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2). Although the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. In \ldots
@article{schefferForgottenHalfScientific2014,
title = {The Forgotten Half of Scientific Thinking.},
author = {Scheffer, Marten},
year = {2014},
month = apr,
volume = {111},
pages = {6119},
issn = {1091-6490},
doi = {10.1073/pnas.1404649111},
abstract = {[Excerpt] Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2).
Although the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2).
Although the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. In \ldots},
journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America},
keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-13155158,cognitive-biases,cognitive-structure,scientific-creativity},
lccn = {INRMM-MiD:c-13155158},
number = {17}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"fna92pcvQZ8Ze9y2g","bibbaseid":"scheffer-theforgottenhalfofscientificthinking-2014","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2016-06-22T10:19:57.120Z","title":"The Forgotten Half of Scientific Thinking.","author_short":["Scheffer, M."],"year":2014,"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://sharefast.me/php/download.php?id=zOUKvA&token=29","bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"The Forgotten Half of Scientific Thinking.","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Scheffer"],"firstnames":["Marten"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2014","month":"April","volume":"111","pages":"6119","issn":"1091-6490","doi":"10.1073/pnas.1404649111","abstract":"[Excerpt] Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2). Although the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2). Although the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. In \\ldots","journal":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","keywords":"*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-13155158,cognitive-biases,cognitive-structure,scientific-creativity","lccn":"INRMM-MiD:c-13155158","number":"17","bibtex":"@article{schefferForgottenHalfScientific2014,\n title = {The Forgotten Half of Scientific Thinking.},\n author = {Scheffer, Marten},\n year = {2014},\n month = apr,\n volume = {111},\n pages = {6119},\n issn = {1091-6490},\n doi = {10.1073/pnas.1404649111},\n abstract = {[Excerpt] Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2).\n\nAlthough the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. Although thinking is the core business of scientists, we rarely ponder how it thrives best; this is ironic, as there is abundant scientific insight to draw upon. For example, it is now known that thinking has two complementary modes: roughly, association versus reasoning (1). We systematically underestimate the role of the first (1), and the way our institutions, meetings, and teaching are organized heavily reflects this imbalance. By contrast, many of the greatest scientists systematically nurtured a balanced dual-thinking process. We should follow their example and reform scientific practice and education to catalyze the unusual combinations of knowledge that often turn out to have the highest impact (2).\n\nAlthough the precise physiological basis of the two aspects of cognition is not yet resolved, it has become clear that the complementary mode to rationality is the '' associative machine'' in our brain. The capacity to make remote associations is linked to creativity (1). This capacity varies between persons, but also depends on our state of mind. For example, ideas may come while falling asleep, peeling potatoes, or walking. In \\ldots},\n journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America},\n keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-13155158,cognitive-biases,cognitive-structure,scientific-creativity},\n lccn = {INRMM-MiD:c-13155158},\n number = {17}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Scheffer, M."],"key":"schefferForgottenHalfScientific2014","id":"schefferForgottenHalfScientific2014","bibbaseid":"scheffer-theforgottenhalfofscientificthinking-2014","role":"author","urls":{},"keyword":["*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM","~INRMM-MiD:c-13155158","cognitive-biases","cognitive-structure","scientific-creativity"],"downloads":0},"search_terms":["forgotten","half","scientific","thinking","scheffer"],"keywords":["cognitive-biases","cognitive-structure","scientific-creativity","*imported-from-citeulike-inrmm","~inrmm-mid:c-13155158"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["5S2zj2hKW8TWTkuMq"]}