I think I admire lots of scientists for lots of reasons. People like Galileo deserve a lot of admiration for putting science before religion and paying the price for it. It took bravery to go against the churches teachings in those days but he did it because he knew he was right.
I don’t know. What I’ve found over the years is that science is just like any other human endevour. Different individuals approach it in different ways and succeed for different reasons. You get the super-talented, the dogged hard workers, the mercurial performers, the lateral thinkers, and the plodders. It is really hard for me to say who I admire best, because I admire so many for different reasons. It is like trying to compare Bradman and Tendulkar. Which was better or more admirable? Both, for different reasons and in different circumstances.
Hi Michikomiyu and Minishazza,
I might pick someone like Marie Curie, who discovered the elements Radium and Polonium with her husband Pierre Curie, and was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1903 and in Chemistry in 1911. She remains the only person to have won the Nobel Prize in two different sciences. Science and research have have traditionally been male-dominated areas (although there are plenty of women in them now), and she was successful at both being a scientist and having a family in a time when there really weren’t that many women in science.
Closer to home, my dad is also a chemist like me and I admire him, too.
I think I admire lots of scientists for lots of reasons. People like Galileo deserve a lot of admiration for putting science before religion and paying the price for it. It took bravery to go against the churches teachings in those days but he did it because he knew he was right.
0
There are a number of scientists that I admire, for various reasons.
Carl Sagan, he was an excellent communicator and researcher in his own right.
Richard Feynman was brilliant and had an attitude of attacking problems deliberately different from others.
Alfred Russel Wallace independently came up with natural selection but was not a rich person. He was a battler and adventurer.
Many of the early naturalists have great stories of adventure as they attempted to understand the world around us.
0
I don’t know. What I’ve found over the years is that science is just like any other human endevour. Different individuals approach it in different ways and succeed for different reasons. You get the super-talented, the dogged hard workers, the mercurial performers, the lateral thinkers, and the plodders. It is really hard for me to say who I admire best, because I admire so many for different reasons. It is like trying to compare Bradman and Tendulkar. Which was better or more admirable? Both, for different reasons and in different circumstances.
0
Hi Michikomiyu and Minishazza,
I might pick someone like Marie Curie, who discovered the elements Radium and Polonium with her husband Pierre Curie, and was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1903 and in Chemistry in 1911. She remains the only person to have won the Nobel Prize in two different sciences. Science and research have have traditionally been male-dominated areas (although there are plenty of women in them now), and she was successful at both being a scientist and having a family in a time when there really weren’t that many women in science.
Closer to home, my dad is also a chemist like me and I admire him, too.
0