tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071936218849577375.post7772306717814353934..comments2024-03-19T23:20:47.782-07:00Comments on Unintentional Irony: Justifications IIJames Killushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08265296146264452333noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071936218849577375.post-74974380863939574492008-01-22T12:28:00.000-08:002008-01-22T12:28:00.000-08:00You're right about the "operational efficiency" pa...You're right about the "operational efficiency" part. I realized early on in my scientific career that actually accomplishing any science would require a certain degree of chicanery, if not to say outright con jobs. The people paying the bills rarely wanted the answers to unknown questions; they wanted specific answers to specific problems and the "unknown" stuff just gets in the way.<BR/><BR/>I assume that's how astrology happened. An astronomer's got to pay the bills somehow...James Killushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08265296146264452333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5071936218849577375.post-23351668523910480472008-01-21T07:34:00.000-08:002008-01-21T07:34:00.000-08:001. Ask a question that a) has an answer that b) yo...1. Ask a question that a) has an answer that b) you don't already know.<BR/><BR/>2. Answer the question.<BR/><BR/>3. Progress.<BR/><BR/>That is not as operationally efficient as the process of some of your political associates and, it appears, your project manager.<BR/><BR/>1. Know an answer.<BR/><BR/>2. Reframe the question until its answer is 1).<BR/><BR/>3. Stasis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com