>His contribution to the body of scientific knowledge was deserving of a doctorate as determined by experts in the field, no?
This is what I dont agree on. A doctorate is not a prize for the best scientific work from a student that year.
This is what I dont agree on. A doctorate is not a prize for the best scientific work from a student that year.
There’s a long history of payola in university. IMO our entire accreditation and credentialing system has so much corruption, anything but reproducible STEM education should be treated as being of suspect value.
The credential is earned due to social hoop jumping, and very specific. It doesn’t really say much about general intelligence or worker skill. I’ve worked with PhDs that were so obtuse nothing was accomplished.
It’s like trying to make a simple knife by first bootstrapping a universe to mine engineered carbon steel of the purest quality.
In the end political network effects dictate reality. And that realm is clearly rife with delusions of grandeur.
I'm not sure I disagree, or at least not by much. But your statement seems rather odd for an account named (I presume) after Chomsky, since he isn't exactly STEM.
He also advocates for science based social policy all the time.