Mailbag
jstemwedel | June 2, 2006Months ago, I wrote about the Department of Homeland Security's concerns about chemistry sets. (You know, for kids.) Well, it seems the push to make the world child-safe (or perhaps not legally actionable?) continues.
Reader Donn Young points me to this story from Wired about government crackdowns on companies catering to garage chemistry enthusiasts. Donn also shares a story of his own:
Growing up, two friends and I had a chemistry 'club' centered around our chemistry sets and 'labs' in our basements. My friend's mother, who was a chemist at Battelle Memorial Institute, would give us…
jstemwedel | June 2, 2006There's a lot going on in our world that might make you want to gnash your teeth. Some of that stuff, which you've heard about here before, involves the government trying to exert an influence over science -- either in what research gets supported (and who makes that decision) or in how the results of research are reported (or not) -- that maybe the government ought not to exert.
Sometimes detailed analyses of these skirmishes are what is called for. Other times, satire is the best delivery method for a stinging condemnation. Cartoonists, the Union of Concerned Scientists is tagging you in…
jstemwedel | April 30, 2006Yesterday I asked for advice about how to deal with a nest of eggs that presents itself in an inopportune place (a tree slated to meet a gruesome end in a whisper-chipper) at an inopportune time (mere days ahead of when we finally launch our backyard overhaul). The consensus among commenters who professed knowledge of or experience with birds in the wild seems to be that there is no promising way to relocate the nest without scaring the mama bird away and leaving the eggs cold and orphaned. Given that the whole point of moving the nest would be not to throw out the baby birds with the…
jstemwedel | March 23, 2006Do people routinely assert that the tools and activities of your field are utterly worthless in real life? Do they go so far as to say that what you're doing is worse than nothing, because it distracts from the real tasks that need tackling?
Or is it mostly just philosophers who get this kind of reaction?
While there are some issues on which some philosophers focus that don't have what I'd describe as wide appeal (problem of universals, anyone?), I'd like to think at least some of what philosophy has to offer is portable to all manner of questions and thus could be useful in real life. But…
jstemwedel | March 3, 2006A reader asks me to dig up a post he thinks I might have written about various careers, other than research careers, that one might pursue with a science degree. As far as I know, I haven't written a post on this subject (although maybe he has a time machine and is remembering it from the future ...).
It's a very good question, though! Especially since one of my slogans is "Your major doesn't need to be your life path," I believe that science majors can do many, many things in the world of work (just like philosophy majors, only with fewer incredulous looks from bystanders).
But, it's been…
jstemwedel | February 18, 2006It has come to my attention that there is an adjectival form of my surname in use. However, none of the extant meanings of it seem applicable to me and the stuff I do. So, dear readers, I'm asking for your help.
But first, here's the usage to date:
Stemwedelian; alternate spelling: Stemewedellian (which rhymes with sesquipedalian)
adj.
1. (in computer science; first usage c. 2000) practically successful despite disregard of formal considerations (e.g., network architectural trickery that seems wrong at the time of implementation but which makes things work within budget constraints)
2. (in…
jstemwedel | February 16, 2006A couple of follow-up items to that last "how did I get here" post:
At Confessions of a Science Librarian, John Dupuis shares the story of his transformation from software developer to science librarian. I love stories like this, and I kind of wish more of them had been around when I was trying to figure out what to be when I grew up.
In the comments, to my earlier post, Abi writes:
Given the oft-repeated assertion that philosophy and the job market occupy parallel universes, did you have any worries at all when you started out (or, while doing your second Ph.D.)?
Did I have any worries?…
jstemwedel | February 8, 2006Last week, I blogged about my own path from chemist to philosopher. Not only did this prompt an interesting post from John Lynch about his trajectory, but it prompted the following comment:
Dear Dr. Free-Ride. Your mechanistic steps to changing from hard science to philosophy of it were more what I would expect from a hard technically-oriented methodical bench scientist rather than a philosopher of science.
Philosophically speaking (or is this bordering on sociology), what motivated you to forsake the rigor, the demands, the difficulties, the frustrations, and the infrequent joy of the…
jstemwedel | February 6, 2006Last week, while I was occupied with Tangled Bank, a reader left me this comment:
I was just wondering, how did you change from chemistry to philosophy? What little career steps were involved -- if you don't mind my asking.
- From an academic considering a career change.
Below the fold, my secret protocol for changing from chemistry to philosophy ...
While an undergraduate, double-major in chemistry and philosophy.
While in graduate school in chemistry, keep reading philosophy. Participate in philosophy of science reading groups with other chemists eager to spend a few hours each week…