Sebastián Sosa-Carrillo - Personal foundations

Personal foundations

Humility, creativity and teamwork make up the framework in which I have developed my scientific career.

Many people think that scientists are special, nerds with superior intelligence, incapable of interacting with other people and with a very specific (even repellent) personality. And the truth is that when you are a scientist, your view of the world is likely to change and you may find it difficult to talk about some topics. Sometimes you may come to believe that your criterion is more valid than that of others, I confess. But ...

Do scientists have a specific personality?

Are they like those nerds we usually see in series and films? ... And note that I'm a big fan of Rick Sanchez.

The answer is NO, anyone can be a scientist, indeed science progresses because the problem is looked from different perspectives. Therefore, the more people (each with their own personality and point of view) who are interested in the same subject, the better we will end up understanding and explaining it.

That said, when I talk here about scientific personality, I am not talking about an ideal personality to be a scientist, but about how I apply my personality (that of a random guy) to the way I do science.

Santiago Ramón y Cajal playing the nerd

Science and I

Let's start at the beginning, I never considered becoming a scientist until I discovered what science was, and I was already in my twenties. It's true that I had always been interested in how the things around me worked, my parents are curious, particularly biology and electronics aficionados, and there were always books to read and gadgets to break at home. When I was sixteen I had a motorbike that was always broken because I would take it apart over and over again to understand how it worked, but then when I put it back together again ... I always had parts and screws left over. My friends remind me of this from time to time with laughter. In those days, like today, when I look at the stars at night and think about everything between me and them, the microbes, the emptiness, the infinite, ... it makes me dizzy. That overwhelming sensation has always aroused my curiosity.

Photo of Saturn taken by my father from the balcony with his home telescope and an iPhone.

Years went by and my first real contact with science was when I was living in England, not studying, but I ended up reading The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin, a book I had borrowed from my mother before leaving Spain. When I read the whole book I understood how evolution works in living beings and how Darwin deciphered it. I understood that it is not magic, that it can be explained, and that everything makes sense. That was the beginning of my scientific career, without expecting it and without wanting it, I was so hooked that I began to study with an incredible motivation.

From that totally accidental experience, everything started to feed back on itself. The more I learn, the more aware I become of how ignorant I am, and that drives me to learn more, which makes me more aware of my ignorance. In science, every time you think that you understand something, you end up asking more questions. Nature is huge, it doesn't fit in our heads. So in a way, ignorance is the driving force for me to do science.

Therefore, according to the above, I don't think there are any personality attributes necessary to be a scientist. In my case, I would not fit the prototype of the scientist that they have tried to sell us. I'm quite sociable and I'm not smarter than anyone else. What I think is that, to be a scientist you need something that awakens your interest, your curiosity, and then each person defends themselves with the cards they have been dealt, like everything else in life. My cards are mainly three, and I can't (and don't want to) change them because they are determined by my personality. In any aspect of my life, when I go to the fundamentals, those three qualities come out: humility, creativity and teamwork. If I can play those three cards, whatever I do, I will do it with great enthusiasm and commitment, and fortunately, science has allowed me to do so so far.

Put your cards on the table.

- Spanish proverb

Stay humble, bro

As I said above, being humble is one of the foundations of my personality and is one of the qualities that have been most beneficial to me in doing science. When I say humility I mean the fact that I am aware that my capabilities are limited, no matter how much I have studied, there is no time in life to learn everything. Therefore, in cases where my contribution to a project is not sufficient to reach the required quality: the best thing to do is to ask for help. Recognising the need and accepting someone's contribution to your project is an advantage, knowing how to take advantage and learn from it is a virtue. You can't cover everything.

Regarding the above, I want to emphasize that being aware of your limits does not mean that you assume them as static or permanent. In science you have to be self-critical, the environment is very competitive and you always have to be learning. You have to know your limits and overcome them, you have to always be on the cutting edge. If you turn to another expert to help you with a particular problem, that is an opportunity to learn from him or her. Continuous learning is so essential, that just to be able to communicate efficiently with your collaborator, you have to learn to move comfortably at the interface of the different disciplines at stake.

There is another aspect where humility is of paramount importance in doing science: you have to be prepared for failure, falling down again and again is the norm. More importantly, you have to recognise that it is OK and get up again. When you do science, what's cool is to be in new territory. You may have a hypothesis, an idea that explains what you observe, but usually the problem is much more complicated than you think. Let's say you're at point A and you want to get to point B, but you don't know if B exists, you don't even know if A is really what you think it is. So it is likely that if you do it right, you will end up going around this supposed B, to end up at point Z, which you didn't even know existed, and hopefully you were the first to discover it. Here is a link to a very enlightening video about this, told by scientist Uri Alon.

Conceptual outline of the development of a typical scientific project. You start at a supposedly solid and safe point (A) and hypothesise that B is a feasible possibility, so you decide to investigate it, even though you are not really sure that B is real. You approach B, but B does not manifest itself. Finally, after several turns without B showing up, you discover something interesting, related to B, but not B (you may have discovered that B is not possible, and you kill two birds with one stone). You investigate that new direction which finally, after a few more turns (and some frustration) leads you to Z, which has nothing to envy B!

You have to be humble to recognise that the hypothetical point B you wanted to get to does not exist, you were wrong. Well, that's OK, nature is very rich in phenomena, stop, think and look for another path, maybe you will end up at C, or Z, or alpha. When you have learned that falling down is very likely, you develop (for your own good) strategic skills and learn to manage projects in a more systematic manner, which helps you to get up faster and more efficiently. With experience, you end up developing an awareness of opportunity where you take what the "fall" has taught you to create a new idea, and that ends up being food for thought.

Pride only hurts, it never helps. You fight through that s**t

- Marsellus Wallace, Pulp Fiction (1994)

Creativity in science as well as in art

Creativity relaxes me, I think it's because when you create something (a drawing, a vase, a hypothesis, ...) you put your ideas in order and you can interpret them, as if what was in a gaseous state and couldn't be seen, is now solid and you can observe it. It happens to me with music, when I harmonically put together phrases or loose riffs and they make sense, or when I think a lot about how to express an idea in a drawing and I go round and round, iterating until something comes out that tells me what I want to say. That makes me feel satisfied, it's therapeutic for me. Such a feeling is something that also happens to me with science, either when I design an experiment, or interpret results that at first glance are a bunch of numbers, or solve a technical problem that opens the door to new possibilities. Without a doubt, what I like about my work is the creative part.

But be careful, since I started with the example of music and drawing, here I want to make it clear that in my opinion science is not an art, although they may have aspects in common. In art, let's say that the author leaves a personal mark on the work, which makes it unique. The artist makes a work that no one else has ever made like it (unless it is a copy). Whereas in science it is understood that the author's personality must be outside the work. In other words, the interpretation and explanation of results must be purely objective and unambiguous. In science, different scientists can make exactly the same discovery independently. However, in the case of engineering, there is another component of creativity which is to propose and implement a solution to a technical problem of society. Here there is a little more room for the author. But in my opinion, since the desired solution (theoretically) should be the optimum, and by definition, there is only one solution that is the optimum, the best, different engineers would end up proposing the same solution, so engineering is not an art in my point of view either.

That said, in both art and science, creativity is a necessary quality. We can all be creative, but you can't always be creative, it just seems to happen. I just try to take advantage and enjoy it when it comes along. If there's anything like a recipe for creativity in science and engineering, for me, it's to be open-minded, think big, and be learning at every opportunity that pops up. According to my experience in science, to learn and be creative, beyond books and studying, a good strategy is to get out of your comfort zone and work with other scientist whose areas of knowledge, cultures and social conditions are different from your own. This means working in interdisciplinary and diverse contexts, which requires extra effort and humility. For this you have to be open, learn to navigate well at the interface of different fields of knowledge and have an inclusive mindset. It is certainly worthwhile both professionally and personally.

The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes.

- Sherlock Holmes, The Hound of the Baskervilles (1902)

Teamwork, where 2 + 2 is more than 4

You don't have to look very closely to realise that today we live in a society that is dependent on the latest technological advances (even excessively so). My grandparents grew up in a society that relied on technologies that were hundreds of years old, we, today, are basically dependent on technologies that are no more than twenty or thirty years old, at most. And this trend is increasing. These technological products that we consume and on which our society depends are sometimes so complex that they are not designed by scientists or engineers alone, but take into account factors that go beyond scientific aspects. For example, the design of a therapy to treat cancer, a robot that vacuums the house, or a detergent for the dishwasher, involves not only technological factors, but also economic, environmental, ethical and social ones. So, to develop many of the products we use to run our lives, it is essential to work efficiently in teams where members have very different visions of the same product. And this is critical for organizations to be competitive and achieve their goals.

In a context such as the one described above, sticking to the stereotype of the scientist isolated in his ivory tower, laboratory or library may have suited Newton very well, but it is not representative of the reality of modern science. Knowing how to work in a team is extremely important, because when your contribution is not enough, you have to know how to rely on the team (although that was not necessary for Newton, it must be said). Teamwork encompasses several qualities, especially if it is in interdisciplinary teams. Although it may seem contradictory, one must be humble, and know how to listen and learn, without this being at odds with the capacity for independence and self-confidence. When you work in an interdisciplinary team, you may often be the only expert in your area of knowledge. You therefore need to be independent and confident to lead the development of the contributions for which you are responsible as an expert. But at the same time you have to be humble enough to listen to others who have more expertise than you in their respective disciplines. That, in my experience, is the best thing about working in interdisciplinary teams, as you are always learning from others, but also teaching, because everyone has an area in which they are an expert and takes on that responsibility, while we are all pulling in the same direction.

As a personal example, my interest in working in interdisciplinary teams began before I finished my degree in biotechnology at the Universitat de València, when I discovered the field of systems biology. Systems biology is a discipline based on the idea that biological systems are very complex and cannot be fully understood by studying their individual parts. Instead, it seeks to understand how the parts interact to form a functional whole. The study uses techniques and tools from different disciplines, such as molecular biology, physics, computer science and mathematics to analyse and model biological processes. Normally, a single researcher does not have the resources to carry out this type of research on his or her own; collaboration in interdisciplinary teams is essential. Because of my interest in systems biology, I have been able to work side by side with engineers, mathematicians or physicists, and I have had to express my ideas at the interface of different disciplines, in order to be understood and establish collaborations. After that experience, I am convinced that being surrounded by people who think differently, listening, learning, teaching and pursuing the same goal, is great, enriching, and I love working in that kind of environment. In order to do that, I have learned to prioritise and know what my individual roles are, while keeping the big picture in mind. Luckily, I was able to discover systems biology and bioengineering which allows me to develop synergies with other scientists, learn continuously and conduct research on topics I am passionate about, trying to do my part in helping people through systems biology and bioengineering.

Scientific advances often come from uncovering a hitherto unseen aspect of things as a result, not so much of using some new instrument, but rather of looking at objects from different angle.

- François Jacob, Evolution and tinkering (1977)

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse