And yet the Earth moves

I don't really like people giving me evaluations. I am a professor at the Brain Research Institute, and I have sometimes received good evaluations. But I have not been convinced by the overall harshness of the evaluations so far, or by the evaluations that are similar to likes and dislikes of people, or judgments shaped by insular academic circles. It is impossible to properly evaluate people and research topics in the first place, but we can still gather a sufficient number of evaluators who do not seem to have many likes, dislikes, or interests in the subject to evaluate it, and make the subjectivity about as objective as a compromise in the real world.

When subjectivity is eliminated as much as possible from the evaluation in the first place, there is less unfairness. Even when studying for entrance examinations, I much prefer mathematics, where the correct answer is derived through logical thinking, to Japanese, where the author's feelings are asked in a descriptive form. Karate is a very good martial art, but as a sport, athletics is more fair. Nevertheless, the world is full of more fuzzy things, with the exception of math tests and athletics. This in itself is fine, as it leads to a diversity of personalities.

The number of people involved in the review process for Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research is large to a certain extent, but even so, the system is determined by a combination of the number of researchers involved and the amount of work required to review them. Therefore, it is unavoidable, but likes and dislikes do have an impact. The number of people reviewing papers is usually around two, so it is far from fair. Of course, it can be said that the editors actually review the papers before that, but it does not make much difference. Of course, racism and other factors will also have an impact. The same is still true in small organizations, such as a single university, where there are probably few people who can give high marks to people they don't like. In that sense, the Grant-in-Aid and AMED may still be good, even though there are many things to be said about them.

The reason I wrote this is not because I have recently received some kind of evaluation. Rather, it is a message to everyone in the lab who has felt this frustration, and who will feel it again. If you are frustrated, you have to answer with results. If your results do not lead to a grant right away, or if a major journal rejects them, then if the work leads to a Nobel Prize, a treatment, or a textbook, it is the low evaluation that is rejected. We have lost nothing.

「捲土重来、未いまだ知る可からず」

E pur si muove