- #421
ParticleGrl
- 335
- 23
I think I should ask an important question for clarification: What do you think success means for you, and how would you define a "consensus" based idea of success?
Alright, but you answer this- is a middle aged biology phd flat broke with no savings, and no lab access making $8.50 an hour a success by ANY definition? Can you think of definitions of success in science that a nobel prize winner wouldn't fit? A nobel winner shaped their field in a tremendous and lasting way. Do you admit that Doug Prasher's scientific career would have been totally different (and more successful) had a tiny bit more soft money come his way while he was at woods hole?
For me, success in science is a career that let's you do some research that also provides a lower middle class income (maybe 30k-40k a year) and enough stability to have children, but I fail to see why this is relevant.
You seem to be doing your best to dodge what I think to be a fairly obvious point- plain old bad luck can overcome any amount of hardwork,savvy,skill,persistence, etc. As people we want to ascribe failure to patterns of behavior or whatnot, but a lot of life is simply luck. A lot more things are lotteries than we care to admit.