Academic superstars: competent or lucky?

Synthese 194 (11):4499-4518 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
I show that the social stratification of academic science can arise as a result of academics’ preference for reading work of high epistemic value. This is consistent with a view on which academic superstars are highly competent academics, but also with a view on which superstars arise primarily due to luck. I argue that stratification is beneficial if most superstars are competent, but not if most superstars are lucky. I also argue that it is impossible to tell whether most superstars are in fact competent or lucky, or which group a given superstar belongs to, and hence whether stratification is overall beneficial.
Reprint years
2016, 2017
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2016-10-28
Latest version: 2 (2017-11-17)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
193 ( #25,990 of 55,922 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
52 ( #14,453 of 55,922 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.