Why Korean society requires academic based community (translation from Korean column published in ibric.org)
-Why Korean society requires academic based science and technology community. This is part of a translated column published in ibrc.org, where Korean user-based site mainly biology researchers participate.
-Honestly, I have a few confusing points as translating it, more than grammar... -The last paragraph is translated weirdly because I am tired. will be continued... 브릭에 과학협주곡이란 시리즈물로 실린 왜 학술공동체가 필요한가에 대한 글. 한국어가능하면 원문링크 위에 있다. 사실 적다보니 내 번역의 문법 이상의 허점이 보인다. 예를 들면 문장 A와 B를 논리적으로 이해하는 데 있어 모자람을 번역하다 알게되었다 ㅋㅋ.
It starts with Matt Might, who advised the meaning of ph.D. Matt described obtaining Ph.D. is making a small column of your own circle more accurate and pointed so that reaching to bigger circle, which is a whole knowledge of humanity. If this struggling proceeds more, it pushes out the boundary a bit more. According to writer comment of Matt, obtaining ph.D. seems to motivate the contribution of expanding the big circle of human knowledge (Oh really..O.O)
This writer, who is science communicator in Korea, asked questions like how we could approach the big circle in these accelerated and sophisticated subdivided academic areas. (why do we need to and even is it possible) At least in Korea, it is difficult to imagine other than widening their areas with own efforts. Even it is possible for someone, It is not considered positive to devote energy to areas other than own expertise in Korean academic society.
Traditionally, it is true that it takes time to get expertise in one area. The older the field of history, the more time takes. For the people who are not in that area or public could feel this as inevitably unfamiliar. The interdisciplinary research based on convergence or consilience has been emphasized for a while, however, there are few successful examples of it. Basic scientific subjects required as an essential to each area are even not considered significant to the majority of citizens. This can be the same for researchers when they crossing the lines.
So this is why it is even more difficult to communicate with politics and society forming and maintaining science and technology-based community. How can we think of simultaneously idealistic operating principles and reality that molecular virus laboratory or particle physics laboratory should be directed? A big gap in order to solve the problems within science and technology society with these cultural diversities. In addition, it becomes more difficult to narrow the gap between field and policy when considering interests in different situations.
There are no specific individuals or subgroups which can show a complete picture covering diverse and broad whole areas. It is necessary to increase opportunities of discussions between people from different fields to understand situations and direction of each other, which could be reaching to agreements, even the process would be open to the public. However, most associations and organizations which are already existed and required to lead this, seem to be indifferent, or at least passive in their roles. No one denies that science is compatible with the authority, but the scientific community can be, even it has been when seeing the reality. It is obviously difficult to expect discussions and decisions based on different fields themselves.
Discussion of science knowledge as culture is also required. Modern Korean academic environments have been formed after Wissenschaft(writer referenced the changing meaning of science, which initially settled in academic environments of a German university, as you see the word "Wissenschaft". I also would like to translate this later) in 18th and 19th centuries changed to the narrower meaning of science in contemporary. It might be less of time for enough opportunity to settled the culture required for the public.
Last summer in Korea, fake conference Waset and pseudoscience have been witnessed easily, middle school and high school education systems even not yet stable. Accordingly, scientists, journalists, politicians, and the public are unable to narrow the distance between themselves since they do not share common backgrounds. The conditions that must be set in order to establish the foundation are also the science and technology academic-based community.
고등교육을 받을 당시 융합과 통섭이 미디아의 주목을 받으며 시스템 및 개인의 성장에 영향을 미쳤다. 당시 그 바람을 제대로 맞은 세대에 속해있기도 하다. 뭐 나는 아니지만 그 세대가 소비의 주체가 되기 시작하며 지적 욕구가 그 소비행태에 드러나는 것이 본토를 넘어 심지어 유학생 사회에서도 눈에 보인다. 올해 상반기쯤엔 짜증나는 뉴스들도 많이 보도되었고 지적수다를 표방하는 예능 프로그램(내 취향은 아니지만ㅋ)이 인기를 누리고 있는 지금 시점 그래서 과학기술 공동체이 왜 형성되야 하는지 또 교양으로서의 과학기술이란 무엇인지에 대해 의미있는 질문들이라고 생각했다.
-Honestly, I have a few confusing points as translating it, more than grammar... -The last paragraph is translated weirdly because I am tired. will be continued... 브릭에 과학협주곡이란 시리즈물로 실린 왜 학술공동체가 필요한가에 대한 글. 한국어가능하면 원문링크 위에 있다. 사실 적다보니 내 번역의 문법 이상의 허점이 보인다. 예를 들면 문장 A와 B를 논리적으로 이해하는 데 있어 모자람을 번역하다 알게되었다 ㅋㅋ.
It starts with Matt Might, who advised the meaning of ph.D. Matt described obtaining Ph.D. is making a small column of your own circle more accurate and pointed so that reaching to bigger circle, which is a whole knowledge of humanity. If this struggling proceeds more, it pushes out the boundary a bit more. According to writer comment of Matt, obtaining ph.D. seems to motivate the contribution of expanding the big circle of human knowledge (Oh really..O.O)
This writer, who is science communicator in Korea, asked questions like how we could approach the big circle in these accelerated and sophisticated subdivided academic areas. (why do we need to and even is it possible) At least in Korea, it is difficult to imagine other than widening their areas with own efforts. Even it is possible for someone, It is not considered positive to devote energy to areas other than own expertise in Korean academic society.
Traditionally, it is true that it takes time to get expertise in one area. The older the field of history, the more time takes. For the people who are not in that area or public could feel this as inevitably unfamiliar. The interdisciplinary research based on convergence or consilience has been emphasized for a while, however, there are few successful examples of it. Basic scientific subjects required as an essential to each area are even not considered significant to the majority of citizens. This can be the same for researchers when they crossing the lines.
So this is why it is even more difficult to communicate with politics and society forming and maintaining science and technology-based community. How can we think of simultaneously idealistic operating principles and reality that molecular virus laboratory or particle physics laboratory should be directed? A big gap in order to solve the problems within science and technology society with these cultural diversities. In addition, it becomes more difficult to narrow the gap between field and policy when considering interests in different situations.
There are no specific individuals or subgroups which can show a complete picture covering diverse and broad whole areas. It is necessary to increase opportunities of discussions between people from different fields to understand situations and direction of each other, which could be reaching to agreements, even the process would be open to the public. However, most associations and organizations which are already existed and required to lead this, seem to be indifferent, or at least passive in their roles. No one denies that science is compatible with the authority, but the scientific community can be, even it has been when seeing the reality. It is obviously difficult to expect discussions and decisions based on different fields themselves.
Discussion of science knowledge as culture is also required. Modern Korean academic environments have been formed after Wissenschaft(writer referenced the changing meaning of science, which initially settled in academic environments of a German university, as you see the word "Wissenschaft". I also would like to translate this later) in 18th and 19th centuries changed to the narrower meaning of science in contemporary. It might be less of time for enough opportunity to settled the culture required for the public.
Last summer in Korea, fake conference Waset and pseudoscience have been witnessed easily, middle school and high school education systems even not yet stable. Accordingly, scientists, journalists, politicians, and the public are unable to narrow the distance between themselves since they do not share common backgrounds. The conditions that must be set in order to establish the foundation are also the science and technology academic-based community.
고등교육을 받을 당시 융합과 통섭이 미디아의 주목을 받으며 시스템 및 개인의 성장에 영향을 미쳤다. 당시 그 바람을 제대로 맞은 세대에 속해있기도 하다. 뭐 나는 아니지만 그 세대가 소비의 주체가 되기 시작하며 지적 욕구가 그 소비행태에 드러나는 것이 본토를 넘어 심지어 유학생 사회에서도 눈에 보인다. 올해 상반기쯤엔 짜증나는 뉴스들도 많이 보도되었고 지적수다를 표방하는 예능 프로그램(내 취향은 아니지만ㅋ)이 인기를 누리고 있는 지금 시점 그래서 과학기술 공동체이 왜 형성되야 하는지 또 교양으로서의 과학기술이란 무엇인지에 대해 의미있는 질문들이라고 생각했다.
댓글
댓글 쓰기