Good scientists or Good story tellers?

Question

Taking for example two different areas biology and astronomy
- Richard Dawkins vs Stephen J Gould
- Stephen Hawking vs Carl Sagan

Which ones do you prefer to read? Of course you can argue they are all good scientists…

Answer 1

I prefer Dawkins to Gould and Sagan to Hawking - because they are better at populizing science and explaining things well. Plus, they are skeptics. And so am I.

Answer 2

Stephen Hawking is an outstanding scientist who has made significant original contributions. He sticks to science.

Carl Sagan is a good story teller, as long as you don't care whether the stories are true.

Richard Dawkins is also willing to proclaim as scientific truth that which is unsupported, or only weakly supported, by science. He also openly ridicules those who don't agree with him.

Answer 3

I cant say about the first pair, but the second.... Well I like Segan as a better story teller, hes good at putting things in a more entertaining way, however, as a scientist I would have to say Hawking is a better one, thats just my opinion.

Answer 4

I think it depends on what you are seeking. Are they just good storytellers (hence, not good scientists?). Carl Sagan had a way of taking the very difficult and making it easy enough for my mom to understand. He spoke eloquently as well, and his Nova series really brought astronomy to the layperson.

I think the press becomes enamored with these guys and they are all just celebrities. Some of the real genius comes from people who can't talk to others very well (think Asberger's Syndrome)

Answer 5

I've read all four of them and I definitely Prefer Stephen J.
Gould above all others for his wide range of topics,and
his often imaginative and surprising way of approaching
the subject matter.
But most of all for his honest enthusiasm, and deep humanity in which he handled moral and ethical issues.
His essays are not only educational but also great fun to read
and his book ' The Mismeasure of Man ' is a deeply moving
book.( It's quietly and politely indignant and exposes bigotry)
The old rickety second hand bookshop in Amsterdam I go to
actually puts his books in the Philosophy section rather than
in the science section and often I think they're correct.
If you wanted to instill 'a sense of wonder' and an enthusiasm for science into young people I consider his
approach the best, ' hard' science can follow later.

Answer 6

Hell each body with their priorities contained in the right position would nicely be seen smart and obviously you need to assert that your father is smart yet your element that the inventory market went up too quickly and to observe it replaced into actually explainable. THEY were SPLITTING THE stocks ON each between the FORTUNE 500's! PPL that did not have their head contained in the sand stated THAT! understand once you slit your inventory, you get 2 for a million, somewhat of one million (percentage) costing $a million, IT value .50 CENTS! Even STEVIE ask your self can see that the NUMBERS ought to bypass UP! the cost replaced right into a similar! no longer frequently because undergo in recommendations the inventory market had a CRASH in 2003. Edit: did you recognize that maximum ppl in employer will pick the man for a promotion it truly is HIS LEAST competition! Come on now, imagine about what you stated.

Answer 7

They are not 'good' scientists
They are who they are -
Hawking is Hawking
Sagan is Sagan
Einstein is Einstein
Charlie Brown is Charlie Brown
You are you
and I am I