{"id":2806,"date":"2023-05-30T20:03:48","date_gmt":"2023-05-30T20:03:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.studypug.com\/?p=2806"},"modified":"2024-08-07T19:34:23","modified_gmt":"2024-08-07T19:34:23","slug":"giving-credit-to-whom-credit-is-due-claiming-whats-rightfully-yours","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/blog.studypug.com\/giving-credit-to-whom-credit-is-due-claiming-whats-rightfully-yours\/","title":{"rendered":"Giving credit to whom credit is due: Claiming what\u2019s rightfully yours"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

\u201cGive credit to whom credit due.\u201d<\/em> – Samuel Adams, 1777<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This quote sound familiar? Perhaps all too memorable for some of you. The anxiety of being forgotten or the fear of missing out has plagued many looking for recognition and retribution. Even the likes of Samuel Adams, a 17th<\/sup> century, American revolutionary who led the infamous Boston Tea Party<\/a> protest, and helped claimed Americas Independence, understood what it meant to be left feeling forgotten and unrecognized.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 To consider the full measure of how important this notion of inclusion and recognition is, a biblical variant of Samuel Adams quote identifies the timelessness of this humanistic need: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c<\/em>Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.\u201d <\/em>Romans 13:7<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While not verbatim, the essence captured here mirrors the words of Samuel Adams. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although many sympathize with these emotions, folks on the giving end tend to still give begrudgingly. The Oxford dictionary defines this idiom (i.e. S. Adams quote) as: \u201can expression that means you should praise someone who deserves it, although you might dislike some things about them\u201d<\/em>. Even with such interpretations in this modern age, we can still appreciate the honesty and the diplomacy required in building up the courage to render credit where credit is due. After all isn\u2019t this the right and professional manner to behave?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sadly the truth is that this lesson is still being learnt. In some cases, rightly so. In more formal settings and to a na\u00efve audience, a student was once taught to always cite anything and everything that was borrowed \u2013 a quote, an idea, an image. All throughout those years of secondary and tertiary education, this simple rule of paying your dues was consistently engrained, though often hidden or numbed in light of the bigger, scarier beasts of plagiarism and academic misconduct. Students who have gone on to conduct graduate research and publish journal articles are probably the most familiar with this concept. In these murky waters, giving credit where credit is due is paramount \u2013 without doing so would make it impossible to write anything credible and\/or publishable. It is a shame that the importance of academic<\/s> integrity isn\u2019t as prized nor widely applied when we enter the workforce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In the real world, the rules are often vastly different \u2013 A generally pessimistic, yet accurate view, quickly recognizes that everyone is trapped in a vicious, rat race. Everyone fends for themselves, always tries to get out on top, and wants to be bigger, better, faster, and better looking. The weak are trampled and easily forgotten and credit owed is quickly turned into an I.O.U. (i.e. I OWN YOU). Even a reasonable amount of sucking-up-to, doesn\u2019t get you far. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the flipside, the more forgiving world promises credit when labours prove true. Rewards and expectations are clearly outlined and the pressure to deliver is on you. Not to say that this part of the world is free of people looking to take advantage of you or to cut queue – at the very least, the opportunities to claim what is rightfully yours is not out of reach nor out of question. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Copyright symbol. Picture credits: unknown <\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While there are now laws and patents to protect us from the vices of misplaced dues, the age of warnings or odes reminding you to give credit are over. Instead, be prepared to face outrageous lawsuits and threats to sue. Today this concept of giving credit is still proving a difficult learning curve for many. Stories of businesses firing core founders, (e.g. Steve Jobs from Apple), musicians stealing music (e.g. \u201cSorry\u201d by Bieber and friends<\/a>), and likes of the President Donald Trump<\/a> seeking praise for his achievements since taking office, are all far too common. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is it really too much to ask for a pat on the back?\u00a0 Dialing back into the past 17th<\/sup> century provides us with a clearer perspective. In 1711, a feud broke out between two renowned mathematicians, coined by history as the Fathers of calculus<\/a> \u2013 Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz. Leibniz had been carefully recording his discovery and use of differentials<\/a> since 1675. He shared his work on calculus notation<\/a> with Sir Isaac Newton in 1677 that was later published as a memoir in 1684. On the other hand, Newton\u2019s complete work on calculus did not really see the day of light till after his death when they were discovered. Newton\u2019s claim was his work on calculus notation began as early as 1666, although a publication was only made in 1693.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Sea lions pat on the back. Photo credits: Christina Spicuzza <\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

While Newton had a staunch following from the beginning, Leibniz struggled with defending the originality of his work till his death. While there was no evidence to substantiate Newton\u2019s pioneering involvement of calculus prior to Leibniz, the consensus was still in favour of crowning Newton as the rightful innovator. At that time Leibniz had confessed that he had seen some of Newton\u2019s work, but found it little of use. However, this was not enough to vindicate him as thief. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Newton would go own to pen accounts of Leibiniz alternative methods and discoveries which in fact led to their collaboration over the newfound topic of Calculus. Years later, Leibniz name was finally cleared after further investigation had shown that his thought process and methods of arriving at the ideas of infinitesimal calculus and differentials were significantly different from Newton\u2019s. At last, credit given where due \u2013 a shame he didn\u2019t live to see it happen. <\/p>\n\n\n\n