Intergeneration and Scientific Innovation: A Lift and/or Roadblock?

Abstract

We could imagine a super-computer like the “Matrix” encompassing all intergenerational information of humankind since underdetermined beginnings, Lucy and archaic humans. Until today’s generations living together on this planet, a colossal amount of data have accumulated. The matrix would screen across disciplines through keywords according to some initial guidelines initially written in the algorithm. It could also randomly dig into the chaos of big data, connect unrelated disciplines, and check whether this leads to something useful. The problem with this approach is that we assimilate something that we designed and built to the brain that is not our design. Some potential capabilities of the brain totally out of our reach may yet exist. Are the brains of the genius artist and scientist different? What is the nature of the creative process? What triggers this cosmic lightning with a new idea or concept popping up? The intergenerational support role is crucial for creators. The greatest insights in science via abstract concepts are imperceptible to the mind. It leans on all areas of justice. All potential talents should be invited, women with equal rights and underrepresented communities. Justice and tolerance are the greatest challenge of today’s humankind. For the sense of justice is not innate, intergenerational education and legacy are vital to mould the next generations. Woman equality, equity, and human rights are a key process behind free will and further progress. The legacy of Generation Zero, first to have consciousness of the necessity to implement justice amongst humans, empowering free will, will truly create a legacy of progress.

1. Introduction

“The People who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do”. Steve Jobs, Apple’s “Think Different” commercial, 1997.

1.1 Only words

Have you already heard words like “Out-of-the-box”, “Breakthrough”, “Cutting-edge”, “State-of-the-Art”, “Leading edge”, “Groundbreaking,” “Revolutionary”, “Unconventional”, “Avant-garde”, “Leading”, “New wave”, “Vanguard”, “Innovation”, “Novel”, “Spearhead”, and grant “Award” for future research? Those terms are often used abusively. At first glance, they seem to bear a powerful impact albeit they are overinterpreted artificially inflating the value of some research prior to the achievement, which may become an invention or remain a potential path to innovation. Let us not cite discoveries, landmarks of humankind, of past centuries, or recent ones. This would be a deliberately arbitrary choice and a partisan view. All are important in our history and our world. Applying, miniaturising, assembling, combining, appending, modifying, and all adaptation of existing concept is progress. However, the popping up of new concepts from scratch out of nowhere is key. If I chose one, two-century-old or a week-old, this choice would be moulded by my training and background, hence highly biased. Thereby, introducing my personal dogma and influencing the next generations of young minds on a particular path of preferences. In contrast, if I pick an imaginary discovery that humans do not have and seemingly nowhere near to achieve. “Everything you can imagine is real” quoted Pablo Picasso, depending on when the state-of-the-art of science is ready to allow the making of the discovery. Let us take an example that everyone may imagine but clearly envision its impossibility today. A simple example of our popular fables, movies, or novels, is time travel and space travel across the entire universe in a few hours. Sometime in the future, someone may design the “time-machine” imagined by H.G. Wells in his novel. In such a case, emphatic qualifiers such as “cutting-edge” would strictly become useless. Saying, that yesterday, Dr. XYZ found a “Time Machine” is so obviously breathtaking that no extra qualifier would be necessary. Such a pleonasm, the redundancy of words would not sound right to the ear.

1.2 Small steps or major strides?

In the current era, a multitude of infinitesimal innovations exponentially increase to improve life and well-being. Although those innovations are sometimes spectacular, the discovery of new concepts is, by far, not rising proportionally. Concepts are somehow the skeleton of science. We already stand on many. Concepts were certainly cherished in previous millennia. Although the first references to the legendary metaphor “Standing on the shoulders of giants” are attributed to Bernard of Chartres as reported by John of Salisbury [1], it might go back to Antiquity with Priscian (circa AD 500) and beyond. Greek philosophers, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle (circa 420–350 BCE) were looking at “Pre-Socratic philosophers (circa 585 – 420 BCE)”, Pythagoras, Thales, Democritus, also polymaths. This metaphor is derived from Greek mythology: the blind giant Orion carried his servant Cedalion on his shoulders guiding him as his own eyes (Nicolas Poussin, Metropolitan Museum of Art). Thereafter Isaac Newton’s letter to Robert Hooke, the expression gained popularity [2]. The twentieth and twenty-first century mark an explosion of countless pragmatic inventions improving everyday life, communications, travel, medicine, and well-being. Science makes progress by small leaps, and discoveries based on existing concepts. Expanding the original concept, applying it in a new way, adding, or removing to it creates an invention. In that case, “Breakthrough”, “Cutting-edge”, are words often used to qualify the research improving human well-being. I decided not to refer to any example to avoid the bias of handpicking inventions based on my preferences, education, and background. There is a whole spectrum of inventions with different values. Those practical inventions improving humankind’s life are a rainbow with all degrees of importance subjective to everyone.

1.3 Intuitions are invisible to most humans

To simplify the idea, inventions are truly based on previous knowledge “Looking over the shoulders of giants”. Previous generations and great minds who created those new concepts are truly the pillars of those inventions. Then upcoming generations build on the massive Lego Brick, the foundation concept on which inventions are further developed. A concept is almost present in the world of the invisible. The concept is present in the imagination of its creator, rather than in the visible world. A. Einstein about “intuition” of general relativity [3] said: “I believe in intuitions and inspirations. I sometimes feel that I am right. I do not know that I am. When two expeditions of scientists, financed by the Royal Academy, went forth to test my theory of relativity, I was convinced that their conclusions would tally with my hypothesis. I was not surprised when the eclipse of May 29, 1919, confirmed my intuitions. I would have been surprised if I had been wrong.” -- as mentioned in an interview by George Sylvester Viereck (26th Oct. 1929) titled What Life Means to Einstein … [3].

2. How to fabricate or support creative humans?

2.1 Creative humans or creative machines

Efforts were made to reproduce creativity and imagination in a super-computer. The only inherent problem into this conundrum is that the mathematical equations producing the heuristic and the statistics of big data to write the source code behind the algorithm are human made. We could imagine a super-computer like the “Matrix” [4] encompassing all the data of humankind since the intergenerational information is passed on from generation Gen_n-∞, let us say in the neolithic. Until today’s generations living together on this planet, the Silent Generation (Gen_n-2), Baby Boomers (Gen_n-1), Gen X (Gen_n), Millennials Gen Y (Gen_n + 1), Zoomers Gen Z (Gen_n + 2), Gen Alpha (Gen_n + 3) a colossal amount of data was accumulated. The matrix would screen across disciplines through keywords according to some initial guidelines initially written in the algorithm. It could also randomly dig into the chaos of big data, connect unrelated disciplines, and check whether this leads to something useful. The problem with this approach is that we assimilate something that we designed and built into the brain that is not our design. We thereby assume that we know everything about the brain. Therefore, we match something we know with something we do not fully understand. Some potential capabilities of the brain totally out of our reach may yet exist. Let us take a recent example, David Silver, Aja Huang, Demis Hassabis, and others [5, 6] designed the “AlphaGo” to play the board game “Go”, based on the Monte Carlo tree search algorithm to find potential moves based on knowledge previously acquired by machine learning. It would have been unlikely that any human brain would beat up the computer. By design, AI and knowledge acquired by machine learning, is no match for the human brain which deploys less power and speed and less matter volume dedicated for such fast tunnelled computing. However, so unlikely, Lee Sedol, one of the world’s best players at “Go”, on March 15, 2016, Lee won one game which made him recorded as the only human who ever beat AlphaGo [7, 8]. After Lee’s unexpected move, observing the game, the designers in the control room were blaring. AlphaGo went crazy developing endless lines of probabilities branching out all useless options stored in the algorithm. “I think that something went wrong… I think it searched so deeply, that it lost itself” [7, 8].

2.2 The brains of the genius artist and scientist: Different?

Would creativity in art and science depend on two different mechanisms [9]? Would creativity be plural based on different brain structures? Is it innate or acquired via a learning process? What is the nature of the creative process? What makes the difference between genius-like-creativity and ordinary-creativity that all humans express in daily life? What triggers this cosmic lightning with a new idea or concept popping up? What magic causes this? Imaging of the brain was performed on highly creative people from art (writers, film makers) and science using functional magnetic resonance imaging, fMRI [9]. When the cortex was activated and the two groups were compared, no indication was found that the artists and scientists represent “two cultures” [9]. Rather, very highly gifted artists and scientists have association cortices that respond in similar ways. Those highly creative individuals expressed strikingly similar patterns of activation of brain circuits in multiple regions of the association cortex involved in higher-order socio-affective processing and in the REST/default mode network [9].

3. Intergenerational crucial role

3.1 Intergenerational support of humankind progress

However, being highly gifted creates a rupture of continuum with other humans. It elicits a distance with others and may also be a curse. Academically high-achieving adults mostly experience existential fulfilment, while intellectually gifted adults have a disproportionally high risk of suffering from a void, which can undermine their potential fulfilment in life [10]. Individuals with high intelligence who have an enhanced sensitivity to stressors, may dwindle their ability to bounce back from adversity.

Originally the information was transmitted as verbal legacy from Gen_n-∞, from the “Elders” aka the Wise, to the next. At one point of time drawings appeared on the wall in a cave. Men were hunters and became foragers, away from the gathering points, villages. Women were staying, waiting at the camp. Their role was a leadership one to organise life wisely in microsocieties. The women’s role was to anticipate winter or droughts, harsh weather, disease, pandemics, and plan for the survival of the microsocieties. The best leaders were the women who were best at foreseeing the future and providing the safest future to the group. When crops provided food in excess, people started to regroup under leadership based on force rather than acumen. The leadership was then transferred from woman to male.

3.2 Roadblocks in research

The deduction is a logical path at a moment of time given the current knowledge. It has almost become a fashionable trend to work on given paths popular amongst scientists of a specific field. Based on this “logical path”, a cultural tradition of the field is born. Heavily and exclusively relying on preliminary data and on the most consistent hypothesis to test next. The consensus of this community-field is established as having the maximum likelihood of success in the field. Hypotheses derived from the consensus are assumed to bear the less risk and the less research monetary investment in the field, hereby, the most ROI, return on investment. This type of research, previous generation endorsing next is the world’s widespread model… from preliminary data to data. This is an apparent “no-risk”, plausible in the mind of the previous generation (Gen_n-1). Exposing next generations (Gen_n, Gen_n + 1…, Gen_n + x) to illusory safety of making progress by being endorsed. Rather dogmatic conservative science which became a not-up-to-discussion culture through time is clashing with free-will. Yet, the no-strings-attached approach imagination/intuition-based is fully based on logic and deduction. Since it is nascent and unseen not visible to pick on the shelves such a path only emitting weak signals difficult to perceive by all minds. All of which precludes the ladder leading nascent progress to come to full life is based on imagination. The comfortable trap of preliminary data often leads to the same well-anticipated dead-end albeit satisfactory for the mind. However, “The electric light did not come from the continuous improvement of candles” dixit Oren Hariri. Walking on beaten paths may comfort peers, and strengthen their own career and legacy. Clearly, this is not an intergenerational conflict. Rather, this is an age-free clash strictly intergeneration-independent between two different types of mindsets present across ages. The malleability of the mindset is a metric on how much scholars as individuals are ready for a change. The learning process is dual and works on a feedback process. The best students possess minds that can be moulded with the external information that they receive. Their minds may also be moulded based on their own will with the information that they internally create. It appears that ageing leads to more opinionated minds albeit not always true. Major strides were made in physics when freedom of thinking and experimenting were unleashed in the early twentieth century. Such unrest for this three-decade-period was a fertile ground for creativity in relativity and quantum physics and led to major discoveries from scratch. Epic clashes between the two types of mindsets, free-will and not-up-to-discussion cultures, were peacefully raging… It seems that science falling into the no-argument-comfort zone is an easy trap to preclude progress and Eroom’s Law outcome. The latter is favoured by all conflicts of interests ramping up in the realm of science in any system around the globe. This is the conundrum to solve. It is likely AI will come in handy to erase conflicts of interest biases. However, AI brings a normalised science codified by the dogmatic conservative science inherently plugged into any AI man-made algorithm. How to bring the imaginary and intuition dimension in an AI algorithm must be devised. The AI algorithm will flag everything unincluded in the algorithm’s source code. AI will implement laborious data mining and statistical analysis of big data. Abstraction and imagination-based concepts seem to require much more of something that is not yet palpable. AI computer rapid processing is radically different from the in-depth slow human brain strategy that will bring abstraction and concept. Leaving free-will to AI is yet to be devised…

Another roadblock in progress and discoveries is the Google Scholar’s blind summing of citations related to each scientist (h-index & i10-index). A “Two’s Company” within Google [11] created a valiant search tool, the “Google Scholar search engine”. However, science search engines are fine for literature searches as automated librarians. Beyond this limitation, assigning a selective role of the current magnitude is illusionary and unrealistic. Its primitive arithmetic applying to everyone without more complex mathematical weighing assigned to the role of each scientist in publication is highly misleading. This is a total eclipse on the type of contribution of each scientist. Early career or trainees benefiting from momentum by leaders in a leading institution and/or fields that are “hot” are listed as co-authors in top high-impact-factor publications. Worldwide, this will provide an artificial boost for further publications and grants to all listed on those publications or grants in any research system. The inherent bias and flaws of this primitive restrictive Google Scholar arithmetic system and, hereby, unweighing assessment are obvious. Identifying the creator(s) amongst all co-authors is a daunting task and often misleading. Money, ROI, and time which would otherwise be made use of to achieve discoveries are lost to humankind, patients, and well-being. In contrast, Google Scholar is favouring the essential teamwork because it makes no difference in individual roles. The first and last position on a paper may suggest a trend albeit no formal assessment about the creative ability may be made upon the authorship’s position. The Google Scholar assessment may slightly indicate essential social skills of scientists to be a team player rather than the sole creative ability. Indeed, teamwork is essential in research. A constructive vision of progress is not intended to discriminate. Each participant in research deserves to be praised and welcomed and there is room for all talents. Rather it is to also find a space for creative individuals, with special minds, those silent individuals, whose voices may not be heard amongst the loud. Discoveries depend on them as well as on teamwork. Equally, Nobel laureates are also known to log low h- and i10-indices prior to the award. Alternate ways of truly selecting “creative scientists” were thoroughly investigated in a recent article in science [12]. Indeed, we can envision a much better AI algorithm based on the current Google Scholar library by including a mathematical model which properly weighs all parameters of creativity.

4. Free will and imagination

4.1 Free will and imaginary/intuitive progress at stake?

Safeguards are essential to avoid slipping on delusional pathways. On the other hand, unleashing the imagination is also key to success. Two antagonist forces are playing. In fact, connecting one generation (Gen_n-1) to the next (Gen_n), seems obvious and easy. However, connecting is a subtle process where free-will and guidance must cohabit. Progress requires exploring deeper into a specific field, navigating and crossing disciplines. This requires hyper-focusing on the intractable problem to solve, and uncommon, phenomenal mental energy.

Generations spanning over a century are the Silent Generation (Gen_n-2), Baby Boomers (Gen_n-1), Gen X (Gen_n), Millennials Gen Y (Gen_n + 1), Zoomers Gen Z (Gen_n + 2), Gen Alpha (Gen_n + 3). We should view a generation-stratum as stretching around the fixed boundaries. Fixed boundaries were set at a time when countries and kings were drafting the youth to the military. Progress in medicine prolonged well-being. Today, civil and physiological ages do not match according to ancient administrative views, and it will be more so in the future. There are probably members of (Gen_n-1) still influencing today. The connection between generations is a subtle one. Discoveries and creativity work better without any rules. Free-will and freedom across the board are known to favour a creative mind. However, money allocated for creativity and discoveries by governments is limited. Rules and policies are becoming uniformly the same around the world. This is to allow a democratic process with an attempt at more justice in the peer-review. Peer-review is in the process of becoming more complex when progress becomes cross-disciplinary. However, the peer-review process intrinsically suffers from major flaws in any system by its nature itself. Many scientists today have experienced diverse countries and systems, capitalist, socialist, or others, and observed this pattern. Those who share this experience are conscious of an inherent major conflict of interests in research grant peer-review and research orientation. Whether the reason would be survival, money, advantages, privileges, promotion, nomination, influence, nepotism, fame, cultural, religious, gender, race, ignorance, conscious/unconscious incompetency, unqualified, age discrimination, sexual orientation, university location, department, personal, inimical, insufficient time, motivation, tedious process, loss of time, etc. Ignoring those human factors is forgetting we are humans. All of which comes down to competition on limited positions or funds. This pattern is found universally across countries although claims are made that the peer-review process is guaranteed impartial and flawless in full integrity. Sadly, the peer-review process was not seen as such by many prominent scientists such as Einstein who experienced an initial serious backlash that almost totally barring him to pursue a research career.

4.2 How to champion imagination and free will?

Today, grant-peer-review is a human process. Artificial intelligence (AI) seems to be a method of eradicating conflict of interest as well as avoiding redundancy. Science is accumulating such overwhelming data far beyond the reach of the human mind. An efficient way to remove human factors and conflicts of interest would be to make use of AI in the research grant peer-review process. However, the limitation on the imaginary dimension makes it problematic to use. Furthermore, the contribution of generations with more time available and less susceptible to conflict of interests such as the Baby Boomers (Gen_n-1) and in some from Silent Generation (Gen_n-2) may be an additional option to discuss.

The overarching research-peer-review process determines scientific discoveries. Wrongly performed, it may preclude future potential discoveries and become a serious threat to progress. An exaggerated amount of money may wrongly be allocated and lead to the Eroom’s Law, the reverse of Moore’s Law [13, 14]. Where progress becomes inversely proportional to the investment, with a negative ROI. The issue goes beyond the duty of integrity. A biased peer-review bound in a gilded cage may become a threat to the freedom of research where imagination is key. Progress encompasses a vision of the future. Peer-review of articles is less exposed to conflict of interests because it intends to go to the public for some research already implemented.

5. Intergenerational transfer and influence on the brain

5.1 Role to protect and nurture children’s minds

Brain development in children is affected by their social environment. A social experience at this time is instrumental to the acquisition of social, cognitive, and emotional competency [15]. Adverse experiences such as poverty, neglect, hostility, and violence, are associated with a higher risk of developing mood and behavioural disorders. Adversity in the mother’s early-life affects mothering behaviour in later-life and how these effects may be perpetuated inter-generationally. Parental spatial training before fertilisation facilitated spatial learning and memory in their offspring likely through increased expression of BDNF, phosphorylated ERK1/2, and acetylated H3K14 in rats [16, 17, 18].

5.2 Transfer, evolution and genomics

A modelling approach model of coevolution of the brain size and mortality, aka life history theory (LHT) was devised [19]. Mathematical and statistical modelling investigate brain growth in species and the development as an investment in the physiology and brain abilities [19]. In a physiological manner, the evolution is measured in terms of newly acquired somatic tissue—muscles, brains, etc. In terms of community and social senses, those acquisitions include body abilities and strength, skill, knowledge, and other abilities. Because such abilities variably decline depending on physiological ageing, allocations to maintenance can also be seen as investments for a societal benefit. Therefore, the competition present–future fertility-reproductivity is related to brain size and performance. This tradeoff can be considered as an optimal societal advantage of abilities versus reproduction. The brain provides a special physiological, behavioural, and societal advantage. The brain has the ability to transform present situations into future performance. The development of the cerebral cortex amongst higher primates provides increased gain in abilities. The natural selection of the neuronal system involved in memory depends on the sacrifice and advantage realised over the organism’s lifetime. Higher development of the brain early in life sacrifices huge energetic cost and time as well as maintaining the brain activity throughout life. During the first year of life, 65% of the total body expenditure in humans, for example, is used to support the development of the brain. In adult life, the brain weighs 2% of the body mass while hacking 20% of the total body energetic expenditure. Another potential cost of the brain is lower performance early in life driving the incompetence of human infants, and even children, in many motor tasks. The ability to learn and to develop across generations of the brain becomes a special form of highest societal gain with coevolution of intelligence and longevity. A longer life allows more contributions from highly skilled individuals. The emergence of our species reductions in “pre-programmed” behavioural routines as it is the case in other species. Such routines may decrease early performance and further development [19].

Taking these costs into account, the net ROI, sacrificing for the human brain is realised over time. In a niche of restricted learning, a large brain is at risk of a relatively small impact on productivity later in life but higher costs early in life [19].

5.3 Intelligence/longevity tradeoff: Cooperation

The concurring blooming of intelligence and longevity in humans followed entry into a niche that demanded an extended protected childhood learning phase, where investment in this phase was made justifiable by higher adult productivity. Such a tradeoff requires societal large intergenerational resource flows [19]. It is not totally understood why advancing brain development is correlated to lower fertility to explain the thousand-fold difference in insect life spans. There is a natural selection pressure to extend the portion of lifespan of skilled adult-human. This is a ROI, a sort of payback to the societal contribution in childhood and the longer time required in life to acquire further complex skills. Intergenerational resource transfers and other late-life contributions in social species may be selected for post-reproductive longevity [20]. Fertility declines with age and exposes to mutations. Unlike other species, humans benefit from extra lifespan savers beyond the reproductive window. Mutations occurring in this “selection shadow” are invisible to other species’ observing “normal” selection pressure [20, 21]. Human menopause and post-reproductive longevity are unique amongst primates and across species, yet unexplained by classical approaches [20]. It suggests that early life societal unproductive investment, transfers, and other social processes may alter selection via a mechanism missing in classic evolutionary models [20]. Therefore, promoting selection against late-acting deleterious alleles, they prolong lifespan. Constant societal pressure for highly skilled professionals demand and increased time to train skew the lifespan far beyond the reproductive window. This indirect fitness contribution could drive selection for survival well beyond the ages of reproductive cessation. This is a fast trend already observed across the globe, including in developing countries. In the near future, we may imagine that the productive high-skilled professional window will extend towards and beyond the centenarian zones to increase the required societal ROI. Modifying the force of selection that shapes the age profiles of survival and fertility is fundamental to fitness and societal productivity. While human menopause has been theorised to result from life history tradeoffs or intergenerational conflict, other observed patterns of reproduction as a given and model selection on extended post-reproductive lifespan due to food and other transfers. In evolution, chimpanzees are the most recent closest common chimpanzee–human ancestors 5–7 million years ago. Chimpanzees are rapidly self-sufficient foragers after a few years albeit they will never produce large food surpluses. Chimpanzee feeding ecology is thus not expected to cause selection pressure for late-adult survival [20, 21]. Chimpanzees fail to learn new skills and behaviours diverging from their imprinted inherited species habitual repertoire [22]. Unlike human-hunter-gatherers relying on others for up to three decades of high-skilled training ultimate goal, is to later generate surpluses and high-value societal ROI through adulthood and into late life. Therefore, why are intergenerational transfers not universally spread out across all species if they are so valuable? Transfers are costly to donors. However, the sharing of resources is felt less a burden when donors enjoy surpluses. Thereby, Gen X (Gen_n), will vouch for yet unproductive Gen Z (Gen_n + 2), Gen Alpha (Gen_n + 3) and for still productive Baby Boomers (Gen_n-1), and in some cases, Silent Generation (Gen_n-2). World societies capable to vouch for across generations in such a way are the ones enjoying the best “well-being” and GDP per capita. This is also correlated to scientific progress generating the greatest added-values other than depending on natural resources. This conclusion applies to countries that do not rely only on “distorted GDP-per-capita for tax havens”, whose economic data are artificially inflated by tax-driven corporate accounting entries. The well-being of an individual includes surpluses across board, including all basic needs. Well-being also means burden-free, from food to social welfare and security, and also includes tuition payment. All extra societal time lost includes time to find a spouse/intimate partner so individuals may focus on the high-skilled duties required for the societal payback. The ability to motivate the psychology and produce a surplus in a complex subsistence niche is a prequel to intergenerational transfers. Donors can recoup losses by targeting kin so benefits increase inclusive fitness via complex cooperation [20]. Social systems fostering multilevel complex cooperation help to make intergenerational transfers more profitable.

5.4 Intergenerational brain structure similarities

Structural neuroimaging (MRI) can assess intergenerational transfer effects on brain structure, function, and behaviour by investigating brain similarities in caregiver-child brains. Significant structural brain similarities exist for mother–child in the reading brain networks for measures of local gyrification, surface area, and grey matter volume [23]. Observed structural brain similarities in local gyrification, surface area and grey matter volume are specific to mother–child pair [23]. The human brain weighs 2% of the body mass and consumes 20% of the total body energy. The oxidative metabolism/ATP pathway is the mainstream provider for the exorbitant brain energetic expenditure [23]. The main portion of which is dedicated to the synaptic transmission. It also promotes synapse growth and plasticity. It has been suggested that parental physical exercise may promote offspring’s structural brain development by 12% likely through an increase by 16% of neurogenesis. These structural brain changes are associated with a significant 21% improvement in neurobehaviour, such as improved learning and memory, and reduced anxiety [24].

6. Justice and scientific progress

6.1 Learning justice, woman equality and human rights

Justice is likely one of the most challenging disciplines that the human mind faces. Would human justice exist? Would justice remain beyond the reach of the human mind? What is the role of intergenerational cooperation there?

Intergenerational transmission is a key factor to pass on the sense of justice across generations. How intergenerational information is passed on from generation Gen_n-∞, let us say from immemorial times until this day is moulding today’s populations. Today several generations are living together on this planet, the Silent Generation (Gen_n-2), Baby Boomers (Gen_n-1), Gen X (Gen_n), Millennials Gen Y (Gen_n + 1), Zoomers Gen Z (Gen_n + 2), Gen Alpha (Gen_n + 3). It heavily depends on the quality of the education system.

6.2 The point of view of the woman. The state of women’s rights today and the intergenerational culture

This issue was highly neglected for centuries. The respect of human rights, women’s right to equality and equity, protection of children, and their access to education are all educational intergenerational education. Any form of violence passive or active against women such as hierarchical use of powerful leadership positions should be described by Gen_i to the next generations Gen_i + j and hereby banned. It becomes necessary to bring a further dimension to humankind, the woman’s dimension. Survival of humankind at darkest times of famine, plagues, diseases, stillborn, mother’s deaths, invasions, and mass killings, never left any space of expression for women as they were the pillars of our species’ continuity. I wanted this section to be a woman’s tribune in their own terms, a woman’s hallmark. Therefore, I merely quoted their sentences, unaltering their words. Bel Hooks describes “Fear is the primary force upholding structures of domination. It promotes the desire for separation, the desire not be known” [25, 26]. The culture of male domination is established on the cultivation of fear to secure obedience. Modern society occults the hidden fear of women which they apprehend to express. Teaching generations Gen_i + j about a woman’s freedom to decide her own self, inner self, and body, her whole free will is key for future generations. The contentment of a woman and its respect must be taught and explained. Julia May Jonas explains in her book: “Her desire is wrapped up not only in what She wants but also how She perceived inside that want” [27, 28]. Woman’s contentment must be respected and time to formulate it as well. There’s another way to envision gender relations in a peaceful way rather than confronting them. While Joy Harjo speaks about her own learning she exquisitely says: “She taught me that there is no separation between being a poet and being a mother and lover. All are warrior roles” [29, 30]. As a native American Joy goes on in a peaceful approach in a beautiful way: “We keep our vibration higher by prayer, by kindness, by taking care of what we were given to do … by speaking that which holds truth”. Another of woman’s right expressed by Joshua Prager as: “That a woman would protest abortion and yet seek one herself was no surprise to Boyd… Abortion was far too commonplace to be had only by those who supported it” “In ancient Greece, she would have had no problem ending her pregnancy” and “The Bible Old and New Testament contains no text about abortion” [31, 32].

6.3 Optimism for woman’s rights? The role of intergenerational education

Another way women see the world, their inner selves and the outside world, Olga Tokarczuk portrays her feeling as: “Sometimes I feel as if we’re living inside a tomb, a large, spacious one for lots of people… The prison is not outside, but inside each of us. Perhaps we simply don’t know how to live without it” [33, 34]. Later, Olga extends her thought to the freedom and compassion for animal welfare as: “People have a duty toward Animals to lead them – in successive lives – to Liberation. We’re all traveling in the same direction, from dependence to freedom, form ritual to free choice”. The beauty of compassion and empathy, free will, and the notion of respect for the living suffering in pain. This is not easily self-taught, this is the legacy of generation Gen_i to the next Gen_i + 1, Gen_i + 2, … Gen_i + j. the opposite view may also be professed entailing detrimental results to the community. Another view of compassion as felt by another author is particularly moving: “They are fungi that keep tree stumps alive. They attach two trees and can transfer nutrients between them. Occasionally, then, when one tree falls, and can no longer catch the light with its own leaves, it is still fed by the others…” [35, 36]. The realm of plants has established for itself compassion and solidarity for others. Away from cultural standards intended to govern woman’s emotion, Annie Ernaux goes: “I do not wish to explain my passion – that would imply that it was a mistake or some disorder I needed to justify – but simply to describe it” [37, 38]. Freedom of choice, freedom of lifestyle, Annie Ernaux, Nobel laureate 2022, is outraged that males may have all rights and freedom and women repressed. Therefore, she will not justify her passion, behaviour, and attitude. In the darkest times of humankind’s survival, wars, destructions, invasions, killings, rapes, plagues, and diseases, leaders and men of God of all religions worldwide enacted drastic policies. Women were bearing babies, and their role was restricted and dedicated to this goal. Survival was at stake and extreme measures were taken. Women were dominated by men, and this has become a societal and religious tradition to this day. Yet today many societal and religious policies still rely on this ancient concept without amending nor revising. Annie still goes on: “Knowing whether I would agree to pay the imaginary price of disaster is a sure means of assessing the strength of my desire” [37, 38]. Annie was totally aware that societal and religious dogma would be repelling her free-will as a woman and condemn her for breaking the rules. She accepted her fate and decided to go for it. This was expressing courage at a time opprobria, societal, and religious shame would fall on her soul. Then, in the process, she discovered her identity without hurting anyone else. Annie says about it: “I measured time differently, with all my body. I discovered what people are capable of, in other words, anything: sublime or deadly desires… Without knowing it, he brought me closer to the world”.

6.4 Consciousness of today’s woman identity, an intergenerational learning

A step towards woman humiliation and belittling was crossed when Xochitl Gonzalez says: “And I watched his world get smaller… People with big visions, Prieto, aren’t meant to shrink themselves” [39, 40]. Prieto, her brother from Puerto-Rican extraction and a prominent NYC politician, had his career jeopardised by his potential coming out and the disclosure of his HIV status. It felt naturally normal that the male ascended the social ladder while the sister lagged. The sister was on the edge of also becoming public appearing on morning shows thanks to her flair and being “business extraordinaire”. Then Xochitl goes one step further saying: “Your admittance to this place is nothing more than a minuscule gesture to reaffirm the myth of an American meritocracy… a system in which the only thing you’re certain is to lose your sense of self”. Xochitl also mentions how debt is one of the man’s great tools to keep women and underprivileged people oppressed. For those who travelled the world, this scheme replicates itself across borders around the globe. Xochitl keeps going: “My whole life I felt like my skin was too small for what was possible for me – as a Woman, as a Boricua…”. Xochitl highlights here her fate… the destiny of a woman to be belittled in a man-designed world. Sometimes, we may hear societal leaders, politicians, or religious, suggesting that it is a curse to be born a woman. Another brilliant way of looking at things, by Bernardine Evaristo, in a humoristic way: “I’ve been really interested in finding the form that fits what I have to say, rather than fitting what I have to say into any of the traditional forms” [41, 42]. In a man-made system, there was no room to truly express women’s feelings always traditionally repressed. The format and the tribune to publicly speak out are on man-design with suppression, loudly interrupting while speaking. The men’s club shares no mercy for outliers and outlaws. Another interesting way to approach life together, is to look at the animal realm, and how they perceive the world, Ed Yong explains: “Every animal can only tap in a small fraction of reality’s fullness. Each is enclosed within its own sensory bubble, perceiving but a tiny sliver of the immense world” [43, 44]. The bubble, the “umwelt”, may be seen in Freudian psychanalytic dimension as the inner self. All living creatures have their own umwelts. Whether it is perceiving electric, electromagnetic, or ultrasounds, each umwelt has a different value for each individual. Women and men have a world of their own within their inner self. Becoming conscious and discovering it in others, allows to rally all members for a more proficient, better society and well-being. Playing a game of eleven, five males, six women, will be no match compared to a team made of five males only. Suppressing, and repressing six women on the team will preclude wealth, GDP, and the well-being of the community. This is shooting oneself in the foot. The restriction of the tunnel vision of our inner self, our umwelt, may be lifted, hereby, opens to the world. The identity as a woman in a world of male writers was majority was seen from the male angle. Finding their true identity, was challenging. This is what Catherine Lacey said about it: “She lived in a play without intermission in which she’d cast herself in every role. What I had begun feeling had changed me into a person who could not make sense to herself until X introduced me to who I was. I’d somehow known her before I knew her…” [45, 46]. Another way women may look at their personalities, form a grandmother with a very young mind: “Good luck! Have fun! Don’t work too hard! She says that where she’s from it’s the most subversive thing you can say because they didn’t believe in luck and fun was a sin and work was the only thing you were supposed to do” [47, 48]. An approach more energetic was: “We need tragedy, which is the need to love and the need… not just the need, the imperative, the human imperative… to experience joy. To find joy and to create joy. All through the night. The fight night” [47, 48].

6.5 Crimes against women, humanity and our intergenerational duty

Crimes against women or children during the war are considered as “Crimes against Humanity”. Women, as innocent civilians, have long been the targets of suffering and martyrdom in the hands of males. The atrocities are underreported and are an “accepted” aspect as “normality” in all conflicts. The reason is that it always happened since the immemorial darkest times of humankind, and not much attention was given to that. Before and beyond the killing, women experience humiliation, belittlement, degradation, beating, torture, rape, mutilation, and death. This is a totally inhumane situation beyond merely killing and thereby considered as “Crime against Humanity”. And tried at the International Court of Justice of the Hague. This should be part of the handbook to teach future generations.

6.6 Written statements in world best-selling books and intergenerational impact

It is obvious that written statements in major popular books have great impacts across generations (Figure 1). A written statement of violent killing or discrimination will perpetuate and remain across generations forever across the millennia. The impact on each generation the worst outcome would be to find discriminatory or racist statements in a popular book. The legacy of written discriminatory sentences will endlessly cross downstream generations to the Gen_i + ∞. Such written statements must be discussed, criticised, and contradicted with different means, annotations, or else. In each generation, worldwide, approximately 5–10% of individuals will be radicals prone to violence. At the end of WWII, Mein Kampf, the Nuremberg trials, indictments for conspiracy, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity were pronounced. However, no formal ban was retained about the book “Mein Kampf”. Rather annotations, comments, and education to prevent racism and antisemitism were recommended. Preventive action must be taken to mitigate or annihilate further infinite spreading across generations.

Figure 1.

Influence of various factors on discovery and progress. Positive factors are illustrated in blue, while factors negatively influencing discovery of concepts are red. A discovery directly depends on creativity. The pillars of creativity should offer a peaceful and safe environment for the mind. Any unrest or perturbation of cooperation between individuals precludes creativity. Collaboration to creativity is key and all potential individuals should be recruited based on talent without discrimination. Some factors may have not been initially viewed as direct short-term benefits and were later observed as long-term gains. All factors are influenced by intergenerational mandatory education, support, cooperation, which provide self-confidence. Certain notions don’t exist naturally in other species and require an educative process in humans. An initial investment of energy is necessary with long-term return. See text for further details.

7. Specific transmission from professor to student

7.1 Intergenerational teaching how to learn: mentor - student, basic learning

Wittgenstein emphasises the inner self as pedagogical [49]. During the first years of higher education, intensive intellectual stimulation may reactivate the forming and re-structuring of the self. It is crucial to unveil abilities potentially concealed within the self as early as possible when the developing brain is responsive to moulding. Whilst instilling awareness of one’s abilities, it is essential to expose students to a cross-disciplinary learning strategy that provides opportunities for excellence in higher education. The professor-supervisor becomes a “mature self-object” [50], and serves as a mirror for empathic resonance within the learner. This resonance plays an essential role in promoting “polymath learning”, and is the path enabling the cross-disciplinary vision and inspiring the next generation of scientists. The mirroring effect and idealisation reinforce the student’s self-esteem [51]. Furthermore, a sensitive supervisor conveying positive self-concepts raises the student’s self-esteem. Self-esteem is especially salient in periods of intense intellectual stimulation, causing a re-structuration of the self. Notably, students with excellent work ethics and resilience are prone to this restructuring phase and more willing to embrace polymath learning. Discoveries result from the emergence of influential and novel concepts that change the vision of the world. The hallmark of futuristic teaching is to provide a holistic development empowering learners with the knowledge, skills, and competencies, whilst preserving imagination and creativity. Developing a broad vision of the world allows one to embrace the rapid exponential pace of discoveries. Imagination is a driving force when crossing disciplines and provides a fertile intellectual environment for innovation. It is imperative to teach students how to think logically for developing a critical mind.

7.2 Intergenerational strategic transmission on how to learn

“Strategic teaching” is a methodology and a decision-making process to evaluate pedagogical factors including assessment of students’ characteristics, program goals, and integration of syllabus into the curriculum. Analysis of these factors determines the educational methods made use of by the educator. Digital teaching and learning are at the frontline of a college student’s education. The role of the professor is essential in ordering the topics, organising information, and creating an environment for logical thinking. The educator needs to “diagnose” the affective and cognitive state of the learner. The goal for students is to master key concepts and skills in their discipline. Teaching the student how to learn is a critical component for exponentially acquiring knowledge. Dynamic interactive teaching is a way to immerse students into a topic with active learning involving discussions amongst their peers. “Supervisions”, “Peer Instruction” teaching techniques further foster the learning process. The role of the educator is to pave the way for students to learn and to teach them how to learn. I applied these teaching techniques to undergraduates with successful results. Feedback from students is essential to improve teaching methodology and course content. Based on the student’s characteristics (undergraduate, premed, resident, clinical fellow, doctorate, or post-doctorate research fellow), specific feedback is required to further refine the pedagogical methodology. Personalised teaching time and supervision with students are key. For future engineers, scientists, or physician-scientists, it is essential to motivate and engage them as early as possible in cross-disciplinary critical thinking.

PowerPoint® and other programs are great tools in lectures and inserting one or two minutes of video is engaging. However, a classic pitch while sketching on a blackboard regains popularity amongst students. It provides a pace for student learning and critical thinking. Sketching on the blackboard captures the audience, creates confidence, and establishes a connection with the students. Using a variety of pedagogical methods during a formal lecture sustains a high level of attention, checked on eye-gaze and facial expression. A less formal one-to-one preceptorship (e.g., research fellows, residents and clinical fellows) is also a powerful methodology. Lectures “A Cappella”, with voice and board only, withoutany support (PowerPoint®, paper) have a powerful impact.

8. One step beyond

8.1 The sparkling

The idea, the invention, the Eureka, is real thunder and lightning often occurring at unpredicted times. Ideas pop up in salves like a staccato. They seem to come from an association of various disciplines.

8.2 How to make a genius?

Intergeneration transmission with free will is key to produce progress. The previous generation is the enabler of the next. A polymath is an individual who flourishes a high level of expertise, created in several fields of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and the arts. Polymaths stem from multiple interests to inform their avocations. In modern times, polymathy is attributed to eminent scientists, artists, creators, and performers who contribute significantly to many fields [52]. Leonardo da Vinci (painter, draughtsman, engineer-helicopter designer, scientist, theorist, sculptor, and architect), Michelangelo (sculpture, painting, architecture, and poetry), John von Neumann (mathematician, physicist, computer scientist, and engineer), Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (poet, novelist, playwright, natural philosopher, and statesman), and Steve Jobs (engineer, extraordinary businessman, and marketing mastermind) were polymaths. The trait of a unique genius is not always publicised; sometimes the career remains a private matter. Furthermore, some of those individuals may prefer the peaceful shade to the spotlights. Polymathy may not be a fully innate fixed personality trait [52]. It needs effort, and must always be nurtured and reinforced. The strides on the stepladder of creativity encompass several fields of interest. Therefore, polymathy is also a lifetime attitude and requires energy to pursue the dream. Polymaths may reach a level of unusual hyper-focused state to solve a question for hours, even days. The highly gifted are never satisfied, constantly need to curiously learn to improve, and they do not experience “the good-enough-point, I am done now”. Everything in their minds is subject to curiosity and questions opening the door to more mysteries. When spotted in children, this should be praised, not refrained. The educational systems do not always welcome allocating extra time for questioning. Polymaths soon get bored listening to standard trivial discussions on well-battered paths, disliking small talk. Meeting kindred minds, another gifted, makes them feel energised by a secret synergy, linking their inner selves in a matrix. Amongst kindred minds, they like discussing unprepared diverse topics such as science, social, politics, poetry, literature, history, personality development, intergeneration’s emotional heritage, learn languages/cultures, and striving for a better world. Those individuals become inborn leaders and influencers whether they like it or not, whether others attempt to refrain from their influential gift to spread. These different characteristics may also incite jealousy and antipathy. Those characteristics set them apart. On the other side of the coin, their “apart” situation feels grim to polymaths. Being so different makes the polymaths appear like freaks. Since their next move is unpredictable from “normal” minds, they run across trust issues. They, who are often misunderstood because their next move cannot be anticipated. This is grounds for negative unjustified mistrust. Polymaths are challenged to gain trust and the duty of the Generation Gen_i is to leave leverage to potential polymaths of Generation Gen_i + 1. Polymaths are commonly disliked in our societies. However, major discovery strides. In a few studies, the highly gifted students were observed to have higher levels of human values, compassion, and altruism than their normal peers, and to be more sensitive regarding love [53, 54]. A significant percentage of highly gifted (IQs > 140) are being systematically and, often inappropriately, excluded from the population tasked to resolve the biggest problems of our time or in charge of social, scientific, political, and economic institutions [55]. Success encompasses also resilience to stressors, pressure, and adversity. This results in a loss of assets for society. The role of generations upstream is to foster a more resilient personality of those individuals with behavioural therapy or coaching. Often despised by the polymath, if they are crazy enough to dabble instead of devoting themselves to a single “predestined inborn” calling, those unfortunates regularly earn the lifetime-dishonoured avatar of “Jack of all trades, master of none” [56]. So, why are polymaths going extinct? Our era is tunnelling skills into deep specialisation. Polymaths are largely an unnoticed force in the work market, but it’s also the future of problem-solving.

9. Conclusion

It seems like progress and well-being occur in societies where most freedom, equality, and equity amongst individuals are promoted. In species’ evolution, humans are remarkable, hallmark of its success is the gift of one generation to the other. It seems that genomics and brain evolution in humans were directly correlated to the amount of sacrifice that one generation is ready to accept downstream and upstream. The amount of investment without immediate return of one generation to the closest, next, or previous, is driving scientific progress and well-being. Further valuable contributions upstream and downstream are then enabled concurring to progress. In species’ evolution, such endowment of a generation to the closest, downstream, and upstream may determine genomic variation and further brain development across generations. The ROI, return on investment, depends on how much a generation (Gen_n), is ready to invest in the next (Gen_n + 1…, Gen_n + x), and previous (Gen_n-1, …, Gen_n-x). Potential feedback of this intergenerational interaction, this endowment or long-term investment, is correlated to mould genomics positively and brain performance to directly influence the evolution of the species. Intergenerational cooperation was a requirement in the evolution of the human species and remains a sine qua non requirement of progress. Recruiting, and registering as many talents as possible is the future of progress. All contributions, of women and underrepresented communities, in the form of justice, equality, equity, and tolerance should be welcome for the well-being of humans in a modern society. Sub-liminal abstract signals of intuition and imagination are invisible because they are imperceptible to the senses. The mind may read them under specific circumstances. Our sense of justice and tolerance will determine our ability to adapt and to survive the challenges ahead.

10. Methods

Different methods were used and inspired by the Harvard Business Review, especially for the metrics of Method 2 and 3 ([57, 58, 59, 60]; Turban, [61]). (1). Field Research: As a STEM scientist, I am focusing on intergenerational cooperation influencing scientific progress based on three decades of personal direct observations of academic STEM research across fields. My research and teaching are academic in various fields and operational in the space program. This experience of scientific progress is also with industry, designing medical devices collaborating or founding startups. As a physician, I also see patients in terminal phase. I hear them calling for help while funds are periodically allocated in inherent full conflict of interest environments across countries and continents. Ignoring the patients suffering, those environments are totally unfavourable to progress. I analysed and suggested how intergenerational cooperation is key to improve the state-of-the-art. (2). I performed a critical literature review, focusing on scientific progress with the enclosed keywords listed. To remain impartial and independent, I avoided citing new findings, nor citing my own publications. The articles referred to are analysing the genomics-human brain evolution across generations from Gen_n-∞ (neolithic), until today’s generations living together on this planet, the Silent Generation (Gen_n-2), Baby Boomers (Gen_n-1), Gen X (Gen_n), Millennials Gen Y (Gen_n + 1), Zoomers Gen Z (Gen_n + 2), Gen Alpha (Gen_n + 3). I presented the invisible gain of investing at a loss in the future, in terms of ROI, and later long-term gains. (3). Structured Interviews: Intergenerational transmission of justice is also a factor of societal scientific progress and well-being. An analysis of structured interviews with various authors advocating women’s rights, and underrepresented communities is presented. Those interviews were conducted by Ms. Natalie Portman, once a month, over the course of 3 years. Ms. Portman was guiding the authors with specific questions, Natalie was selecting quotes, and then we were further discussing the quotes in her book club. I decided to include selected short quotes to provide a platform for underrepresented voices articulated in their own words. I believed that a direct testimony in their own words would have more impact than any transformation in sanitised and polished traditional academic language. Equality, equity, and justice are analysed in terms of net societal benefit in terms of general well-being. The intergenerational educative role and support are key players there. (4). Case-Study Reviews: Intergenerational guidance and support are instrumental to nurture cooperation between talents. A brief context of teamwork between genius/polymath and other forms of talent on the teams spearheading future societal progress.