REBUTTAL FROM DR. FREDBERG

Abstract

POINT-COUNTERPOINTREBUTTAL FROM DR. FREDBERGPublished Online:01 Apr 2007https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.01419c.2006MoreSectionsPDF (59 KB)Download PDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesGet permissionsTrack citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInWeChat In quite a different context, Michael Walzer has asserted that disagreements do not invalidate a theory; the theory, if it is a good one, makes the disagreements more coherent and comprehensible. Or put another way, every model is wrong but some are useful. In that context it is quite beside the point as to whether Jere's theory is right or wrong. Rather, his perspective is valuable because it gives us a new question to investigate.In his book Advice to a Young Investigator, the Nobel Laureate Santiago Ramon y Cajal (1) suggests that scientific writers govern themselves by the following rules: 1) have something to say; 2) say it; 3) stop once it is said; 4) give the article a suitable title and order or presentation. He goes on to remind us that whatever is good, if brief, is twice as good. Jere is no longer a young investigator, nor am I, but we both recognize good advice when we see it.REFERENCES1 Ramón y Cajal S. Advice for a Young Investigator (translated by Neely Swanson and Larry W. Swanson). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, [1897] 1999.Google Scholar Download PDF Previous Back to Top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation More from this issue > Volume 102Issue 4April 2007Pages 1710b-1711 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2007 the American Physiological Societyhttps://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.01419c.2006History Published online 1 April 2007 Published in print 1 April 2007 Metrics