Comments on: The Medici Effect http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/05/16/the-medici-effect/ The blog of John D. Cook Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:10:06 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Atomic skills versus molecular skills — The Endeavour http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/05/16/the-medici-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-75226 Atomic skills versus molecular skills — The Endeavour Sun, 10 Apr 2011 01:55:32 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=2292#comment-75226 [...] Adams talks about combining skills, I don’t believe he’s talking about the myth of the Renaissance man. The Renaissance ideal is to be great at several atomic skills, each practiced in isolation. Adams [...] [...] Adams talks about combining skills, I don’t believe he’s talking about the myth of the Renaissance man. The Renaissance ideal is to be great at several atomic skills, each practiced in isolation. Adams [...]

]]> By: John Venier http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/05/16/the-medici-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-17706 John Venier Tue, 19 May 2009 20:20:09 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=2292#comment-17706 This reminds me of the process of transferring medical technology from clinical trials to clinical practice. It is typical that the results seen in clinical practice are not as great as those seen in clinical trials. There are a number of reasons why this might happen, and currently I think it may be partly due to compliance with the protocol. When you think about it this is similar to adopting a new invention or innovation. Even patrons could have an effect; celebrity advocacy comes to mind. Regarding the Medicis, if my recollection is correct they were also important patrons of Galileo. In a treatise he wrote describing the moons of Jupiter, which he had recently discovered with his telescope, he included a preface giving effusive thanks to the Medicis. He really laid it on thick. He even went so far as to name the moons (which he called stars) after the Medicis. I don't know why the nomenclature didn't stick, but if it had, it might be the only thing commonly known about them. This reminds me of the process of transferring medical technology from clinical trials to clinical practice. It is typical that the results seen in clinical practice are not as great as those seen in clinical trials. There are a number of reasons why this might happen, and currently I think it may be partly due to compliance with the protocol. When you think about it this is similar to adopting a new invention or innovation. Even patrons could have an effect; celebrity advocacy comes to mind.

Regarding the Medicis, if my recollection is correct they were also important patrons of Galileo. In a treatise he wrote describing the moons of Jupiter, which he had recently discovered with his telescope, he included a preface giving effusive thanks to the Medicis. He really laid it on thick. He even went so far as to name the moons (which he called stars) after the Medicis. I don’t know why the nomenclature didn’t stick, but if it had, it might be the only thing commonly known about them.

]]> By: tubin http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2009/05/16/the-medici-effect/comment-page-1/#comment-17618 tubin Sun, 17 May 2009 16:35:56 +0000 http://www.johndcook.com/blog/?p=2292#comment-17618 My Dad has written a book which addresses factors influencing whether (and how quickly) new inventions become economically important. <a href="" title="Technological Foundations of Cyclical Economic Growth: The Case of the United States Economy (Hardcover)" rel="nofollow"> http://tinyurl.com/o5w8jg </a> One of the factors he cites is of course financial patronage, usually in the form of governmental support. No matter how paradigm-changing a new technology turns out to be, there's going to be a period of development where the technology simply can't generate a profit. If there's no one willing to make the long-term high-risk investment in development, the technology doesn't make it. My Dad has written a book which addresses factors influencing whether (and how quickly) new inventions become economically important. http://tinyurl.com/o5w8jg

One of the factors he cites is of course financial patronage, usually in the form of governmental support. No matter how paradigm-changing a new technology turns out to be, there’s going to be a period of development where the technology simply can’t generate a profit. If there’s no one willing to make the long-term high-risk investment in development, the technology doesn’t make it.

]]>