2023-07-08 09:14:59
It doesn’t have to be a Nobel Prize: for young researchers to successfully master a “normal” scientific career, with interesting results and not too precarious work situations, is a significant achievement. But for many, everyday life is characterized by hierarchies and dependencies, sometimes also discrimination – these are rarely problems for Nobel Prize winners, since almost all the laureates present at the Lindau Conference are older, white, male, dominant.
In a meeting that was supposed to be about structural biology, there was an uproar: from the first day of the conference it was clear that science was not the most important topic, explained the Swiss Nobel Prize winner Kurt Wüthrich. Because: As a male researcher, he feels discriminated against at the event. While the male moderator wanted to stop discussions on this and postpone them to other events, a young scientist later spoke up and explained that she felt very uncomfortable with Wüthrich’s statement, as well as with the moderator’s interventions, which also included her own contribution concerned. There may be discrimination against men, she said, but that against women is much stronger.
Ambiguous statement
In the meantime, the board of trustees of the conference checked whether the statements violated their code of conduct: This calls for respect. Harassment would not be tolerated, including derogatory statements or those that reinforce dominant social structures – for example in relation to gender or gender identity. According to the values and guidelines of the conference, personally felt grievances should not be discussed in scientific events, explained the board of trustees chaired by Bettina Countess Bernadotte af Wisborg, which can also be understood as criticism of the scientist’s counter-speech. Wüthrich’s statement is covered by the right to freedom of expression, and all participants should discuss constructively. Diversity issues were discussed several times at the conference.
Compared to the specialist magazine “Science”, das reported about the incident, a German molecular biologist explained without naming that he wanted to learn from the laureates for his own life – including how he could establish himself as a responsible researcher. Wüthrich’s comments would therefore have shocked him.
“Great men” as role models
Another discussion was also about role models, but here too clear differences between the laureates and young scientists came to light. The biologist Tim Hunt, who received an award for his research on the cycle of biological cells, began by listing the people who inspired him – first of all his teacher Gerd Sommerhoff. After his death, allegations of abuse were made against him. Numerous “great men” followed, such as Fred Sanger, Francis Crick and Jim Watson, with whom Hunt was in contact at the beginning of his career – the only woman mentioned was Marie Curie, whose biography he found very inspiring.
Nobel Prize winners Tim Hunt (left) and Aaron Ciechanover with moderator Pernilla Wittung-Stafshede. : Image: Martin Walz / Linau Nobel Laureate Meeting
The son of an Oxford linguist briefly addressed his own privilege: he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth when it came to science. Hunt also remarked that he was not convinced that he himself was a good role model – but a possible reason for this was not mentioned: the 2015 Nobel Prize winner caused a scandal that attracted attention around the world with dubious jokes that women in laboratories caused problems and that gendered work was causing problems maybe would be better. He lost several posts over this and later described himself as a living fossil.
“I wouldn’t get an academic job anymore”
Science can fire the imagination, but it’s neither a non-profit organization nor a kindergarten, said fellow panelist Aaron Ciechanover: “If you’re good, you’ll make it – if you’re not, you’ll drown.” However, he himself didn’t want to let anyone drown . When asked if supervisors shouldn’t be judged more on their mentoring qualities, Hunt explained that this is measured in publications – Ciechanover added that there are missteps here: “We now put more emphasis on where you publish than on what you publish – things are upside down.” Repeatedly, the presenter Pernilla Wittung-Stafshede was more likely to answer questions from the young scientists than the laureates. “Publications don’t necessarily mean someone is a good mentor,” she said.
Joachim Müller-Jung Published/Updated: , Recommendations: 20 Hinnerk Feldwisch-Drentrup Published/Updated: , Recommendations: 65 Sibylle Anderl Published/Updated: , Recommendations: 8
In any case, the realities of life have changed significantly. “Nowadays I wouldn’t get an academic job anymore,” Nobel laureate Peter Higgs told the Guardian in 2013, adding that he was probably not considered productive enough. For the period up to his retirement, his curriculum vitae lists a good 20 publications, some scientists publish as many in one year. “It’s hard to imagine how I could ever find enough peace and quiet in today’s climate to do what I did in 1964.” When asked about new publications annually, he answered “none”. There are some things that only Nobel Prize winners can afford, or safe candidates.
For the coming year, the Board of Trustees is looking forward to suggestions for improvement, it says in its statement. These should probably come in.
#Nobel #Prize #winners #suitable #role #models