In the “Dies Irae” (“That Dreadful Day”) of the Requiem Mass one of the early lines is “Flammis acribus addictis,” or “doomed to flames of woe.”* The words of this famous poetic sequence and/or its accompanying music have been part of numerous musical works and movie soundtracks, including Star Wars. But this is not about death and that “day of woe,” that “dreadful day.” Rather it is about life.
Throughout our species’ history, our ancient and contemporary relatives have had to overcome the woe associated with barriers to success. That woe is associated in part with our finite limitations. We can’t fly like birds. We can’t run as fast as a cheetah. We can’t lift what elephants lift. Yes, we have limitations. Yet, we keep striving and, as we do, running into obstacles imposed by members of our species. The bias that prevents some from achieving goals is, in fact, a demonstrable part of human history, and imposed limitations have real effects on real lives.
“Even small biases, if they happen repeatedly, can have career-related effects,” says Brooks Hansen. Hansen and Jory Lerback conducted a survey of scientific literature and the way scientific journals and reviewers accept research and findings by female scientists as opposed to those by male scientists.** There appears to be, according to their findings, a gender bias. But why? Science is supposed to be completely devoid of whim, of bias, and of closed-mindedness. Yet, there seems to be evidence that reviewers and journal editors incorporate a bias into their decisions and judgments.
Could it be that scientists are humans who are affected by their human frailties?
The good news is that more women have their research accepted, and even those who have struggled to succeed haven’t given up on their science and on their attempt to discover objectively the nature of our physical and psychological world.
Sometimes people just need a pioneer, someone to risk sailing over the edge, enter the wilderness, or mix some substances. Once done, imitation seems assured.
I was listening to Tackling Life, a podcast by former Baltimore Raven and football great Ray Lewis and Dr. Christian Conte (whom I know because he grew up in my home), when the latter began a discussion on inspiring oneself to reach goals. Dr. Conte started a segment on inspiration to achieve formerly assumed-to-be-unattatinable goals (at 29:30) by saying, “For the longest time…in track people wanted to break the four-minute mile, but couldn’t break it. It was this unbreakable mark at the ‘four-minute mile.’ And then in 1954 Roger Bannister broke the four-minute mile. And what’s amazing about that is once he did that, now, thousands of people have been able to break the four-minute mile…The moment we understand that [something is possible], that’s possible within ourselves.”***
We don’t have to acquiesce to self-imposed or other-imposed limitations. There’s always someone, male or female, who breaks a “four-minute” mile. That person shows what is possible. Then it’s up to individuals—you and me—to repeat the accomplishment and to build on it. The first isn’t necessarily the best. It is the first. You don’t have to be consumed by flames of earthly woe because of those who say, “It can’t be done,” or “That is beyond your reach.” You—male or female—can work diligently and tirelessly to overcome obstacles and to improve on not only personal achievements, but also humanity’s achievements. And you can do so daily until that dies irae imposes a "four-minute-mile barrier" no one can break. Male or female, "run" now while you can.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKJur8wpfYM&list=RDRKJur8wpfYM
Or, in Gregorian Chant with translations: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=egorian+chant+dies+irae&view=detail&mid=D250B4D9B240B4154BD2D250B4D9B240B4154BD2&FORM=VIRE
Or, the ominous version by Berlioz in Symphonie Fantastique (start at 46:00):
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Berlioz+symphonie+fantastique&view=detail&mid=AE08486785BCBF55DBA1AE08486785BCBF55DBA1&FORM=VIRE
** Nature doi:10.1038/nature.2016.20708 http://www.nature.com/news/journals-invite-too-few-women-to-referee-1.21337
*** Episode 25, Tackling Life (available free on iTunes), discussion starts at 29:30.
Throughout our species’ history, our ancient and contemporary relatives have had to overcome the woe associated with barriers to success. That woe is associated in part with our finite limitations. We can’t fly like birds. We can’t run as fast as a cheetah. We can’t lift what elephants lift. Yes, we have limitations. Yet, we keep striving and, as we do, running into obstacles imposed by members of our species. The bias that prevents some from achieving goals is, in fact, a demonstrable part of human history, and imposed limitations have real effects on real lives.
“Even small biases, if they happen repeatedly, can have career-related effects,” says Brooks Hansen. Hansen and Jory Lerback conducted a survey of scientific literature and the way scientific journals and reviewers accept research and findings by female scientists as opposed to those by male scientists.** There appears to be, according to their findings, a gender bias. But why? Science is supposed to be completely devoid of whim, of bias, and of closed-mindedness. Yet, there seems to be evidence that reviewers and journal editors incorporate a bias into their decisions and judgments.
Could it be that scientists are humans who are affected by their human frailties?
The good news is that more women have their research accepted, and even those who have struggled to succeed haven’t given up on their science and on their attempt to discover objectively the nature of our physical and psychological world.
Sometimes people just need a pioneer, someone to risk sailing over the edge, enter the wilderness, or mix some substances. Once done, imitation seems assured.
I was listening to Tackling Life, a podcast by former Baltimore Raven and football great Ray Lewis and Dr. Christian Conte (whom I know because he grew up in my home), when the latter began a discussion on inspiring oneself to reach goals. Dr. Conte started a segment on inspiration to achieve formerly assumed-to-be-unattatinable goals (at 29:30) by saying, “For the longest time…in track people wanted to break the four-minute mile, but couldn’t break it. It was this unbreakable mark at the ‘four-minute mile.’ And then in 1954 Roger Bannister broke the four-minute mile. And what’s amazing about that is once he did that, now, thousands of people have been able to break the four-minute mile…The moment we understand that [something is possible], that’s possible within ourselves.”***
We don’t have to acquiesce to self-imposed or other-imposed limitations. There’s always someone, male or female, who breaks a “four-minute” mile. That person shows what is possible. Then it’s up to individuals—you and me—to repeat the accomplishment and to build on it. The first isn’t necessarily the best. It is the first. You don’t have to be consumed by flames of earthly woe because of those who say, “It can’t be done,” or “That is beyond your reach.” You—male or female—can work diligently and tirelessly to overcome obstacles and to improve on not only personal achievements, but also humanity’s achievements. And you can do so daily until that dies irae imposes a "four-minute-mile barrier" no one can break. Male or female, "run" now while you can.
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKJur8wpfYM&list=RDRKJur8wpfYM
Or, in Gregorian Chant with translations: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=egorian+chant+dies+irae&view=detail&mid=D250B4D9B240B4154BD2D250B4D9B240B4154BD2&FORM=VIRE
Or, the ominous version by Berlioz in Symphonie Fantastique (start at 46:00):
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Berlioz+symphonie+fantastique&view=detail&mid=AE08486785BCBF55DBA1AE08486785BCBF55DBA1&FORM=VIRE
** Nature doi:10.1038/nature.2016.20708 http://www.nature.com/news/journals-invite-too-few-women-to-referee-1.21337
*** Episode 25, Tackling Life (available free on iTunes), discussion starts at 29:30.
RSS Feed