The Evolution of Thin Skin and the Changing Culture of Academic Science
The world of academic science has undergone significant transformations over the past few decades. As a former lab technician, I have witnessed firsthand the shift in dynamics and attitudes within the scientific community. In this article, we will explore the evolution of thin skin among scientists and the changing culture of academic science.
Twenty-five years ago, when I was just starting my career as a lab technician, I was excited to be involved in immunology research. However, I quickly discovered that the scientific community could be highly competitive and unsupportive. Department seminars often ended in heated arguments, with scientists tearing down each other’s methods and conclusions.
At that time, I believed that such combative behavior was unnecessary. Why couldn’t scientists offer constructive criticism instead of trying to dim each other’s light? But some scientists saw these attacks as a test, a way to strengthen their ability to defend their work. They believed that challenging others’ research was a favor rather than an act of tearing down.
Fast forward to the present day, and the dynamics of academic science have changed. It has become rare to witness scientists engaging in public verbal combat over presented results. However, this change can be attributed to several factors, including an increase in the number of female faculty members. The historically male-dominated sparring culture was bound to evolve. The iconic scientists of the past adapted to the predominant culture, which involved attacking and challenging others’ work.
While this change is mostly positive, there has also been a cultural shift outside of academic science. Many universities have shifted their focus from truth-seeking to promoting social justice and all its quasi-religious tendencies. This new mission has permeated higher education at every level, including medical schools. As a result, criticizing or challenging professors’ or students’ ideas has become unacceptable. The work of these individuals, as long as it aligns with the new mission, is insulated from any criticism.
Students, for the most part, seem to accept this arrangement. They view it as a trade-off for obtaining an easy degree. Administrators, aware of the students’ contentment, continue to prioritize profit over the pursuit of knowledge. The student becomes the consumer, and as long as they pay for their degree, there is no incentive to change the system.
However, the recent pandemic has caused disruptions in the education system. Policies such as forced vaccination for low-risk students and online curricula have led to a decline in the quality of education. As a result, young people have become more selective in their choices. Universities, now competing for a shrinking population of prospective students, may have to cater to those who value an education over an easy degree.
Perhaps some universities will re-embrace the ideals of classical liberalism and truth-seeking that once made the American education system renowned worldwide. Additionally, new institutions dedicated to classical liberalism, like the University of Austin, may emerge to meet the demand for intellectual rigor.
Until this transformation occurs, we will continue to witness the consequences of years of decay in higher education. Fresh graduates, whether from college or professional programs, will not be prepared for real-world challenges. Their thin skin, developed in an environment sheltered from criticism, will leave them ill-equipped to face the realities of the professional world.
In conclusion, the evolution of thin skin and the changing culture of academic science reflect the broader societal shifts in our modern world. While progress has been made in reducing combative behavior among scientists, there are still areas that require improvement. Striking a balance between intellectual challenge and creating a supportive environment is essential for the growth and success of individuals and the scientific community as a whole. It is my hope that future generations embrace the value of open debate and intellectual exploration, setting the stage for a stronger and more resilient academic science culture.
