- Machiavelli's Laboratory is a free ebook that I published on April 13, 2010. It is a satiric discourse on scientific ethics, from the perspective of an unethical scientist. Please don't take any of the advice and opinions in the book (or the excerpts featured in this blog) seriously.
The Discussion section of any manuscript is always the dumbest section, because it includes all of the subjective, prejudiced, dogmatic, self-serving, and unscientific thoughts that motivate the authors.
Still, some reviewers may insist, quite unreasonably, that your Discussion include some conclusion, based on your findings.
How absurd!
You and the reviewer know full well that no useful conclusions can be drawn from your work. Your data can neither establish or abolish a hypothesis. Basically, you have wasted everyone's time and money on a project that has produced no meaningful results.
Just remember that all conclusions, no matter how unfounded, can reasonably benefit from further study. Write your baseless conclusions just as they they were factual. Then, add the comment: "Further work is required." This suggests that you're a humble and open-minded scientist who is willing to accept that all science is tentative. It tells the world that any final conclusion that might come from your work will require more research, and much more money. This tactic turns mindless pseudo-research into your next grant proposal; a reason for building on the preliminary findings expressed in your manuscript.
Nobody knows when scientists learned that half-baked and unfinished projects are more valuable than valid research. The Google ngram viewer permits us to look at its use throughout literary history.
As the graph plainly shows, the phrases "Further work is required" and "Further work is needed" have appeared with increasing frequency throughout the twentieth century. Evil science marches on.
- © 2011 Jules Berman
