5 ms·

I'm a little confused, has this person contributed to science in any significant way ? If not why should we listen to this person and ignore scientists who have

by j7ake 9y ago

I'm a little confused, has this person contributed to science in any significant way ? If not why should we listen to this person and ignore scientists who have actually achieved success in their field ?

BeetleB 9y ago
>I'm a little confused, has this person contributed to science in any significant way ? If not why should we listen to this person and ignore scientists who have actually achieved success in their field ? It's a fair question. But be warned: You're not going to get a much less diverse set of answers from them, though. I would suggest also listening to scientists who established themselves 30+ years ago. You'll likely hear a different story compared to the current crop. In the 00's, some of my fellow graduate students did more work for their PhD than many faculty members I know did to get tenure in the 80's and early 90's. The high level of work demanded today is mostly due to inbreeding attitudes in academia. It's entirely an internal problem.
- throwawayaway12 9y ago
  I largely agree with this, but in some fields I also think it is an over supply of PhD problem as well.
  - altotrees 9y ago
    The oversupply problem is one that doesn't seem to be going away ay time soon, especially in the pure sciences. From my anecdotal evidence, it seems to be harder and harder to get into academia or cross into industry each year. I have multiple bio and chemistry PhD friends who have been either stuck in limbo at a postdoc position or who have left the field in frustration. I wonder if it will correct over time, or if the glut or PhD's will continue to grow.
    - sage76 9y ago
      Is it the same in CS as far as industry positions are concerned?
      - altotrees 9y ago
        Not from what I have read or heard. There still seems to be a need across the board for those with deep knowledge, especially when it comes to certain topics. The people I have known who have had trouble, and studies I have read about the topic point mainly to biology and chemistry as the two hardest fields to break initially with a PhD. But of course even that could change depending on specialization, etc.
        sage76 9y ago
        Among those doctoral graduates who went to North American industry and for whom the type of industry position was known, about 60 percent took research positions . source : http://cra.org/crn/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/05/2016-Taulbee-Survey.pdf http://cra.org/crn/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/05/2016-T... Is 60% pretty high compared to other fields?
      - neuromantik8086 9y ago
        CS and Econ PhD programs both benefit from an extreme amount of cross-pollination between academia and industry. The ability to jump ship from the academy isn't nearly as large of an issue as it is in the sciences (with the exception of physics perhaps). The humanities are mostly screwed. Source (for econ at least; CS is anecdotal): http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/if-you-get-phd-get-economics-phd.html http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/if-you-get-phd-ge...
    - neuromantik8086 9y ago
      Meanwhile, there's been a trend of major corporations closing their R&D facilities because they aren't as sexy on the quarterly balance sheets, which clearly isn't making things better.
  - BeetleB 9y ago
    >I largely agree with this, but in some fields I also think it is an over supply of PhD problem as well. Looking abstractly at the "market", you are right. Asking a person on a tenure track committee why they're forcing newer hires to do a lot more than they ever had to do to get tenure, and getting that answer, is problematic. Nothing in the market is forcing the hand of the person on the committee. Nothing. It is the equivalent of "I'm being a nasty jerk because I can." The market helps in him being nasty, but it is his/her choice to be so.
godelski 9y ago
Generally, getting a PhD in a scientific field means that you contributed to science in a significant way.
sn9 9y ago
She's just summarizing the work of Cal Newport, who used it to get through an MIT PhD in Computer Science while writing a couple of books and managed to get an assistant professorship at a major university shortly after graduating. She mentioned this in her article. If you look at the daily lives of some of the greatest scientists and creatives in history, you'll find that a surprising number of them have had similarly compressed schedules. Newport's blog discusses many of them.

by j7ake 9y ago

BeetleB 9y ago

>I'm a little confused, has this person contributed to science in any significant way ? If not why should we listen to this person and ignore scientists who have actually achieved success in their field ? It's a fair question. But be warned: You're not going to get a much less diverse set of answers from them, though. I would suggest also listening to scientists who established themselves 30+ years ago. You'll likely hear a different story compared to the current crop. In the 00's, some of my fellow graduate students did more work for their PhD than many faculty members I know did to get tenure in the 80's and early 90's. The high level of work demanded today is mostly due to inbreeding attitudes in academia. It's entirely an internal problem.

throwawayaway12 9y ago
I largely agree with this, but in some fields I also think it is an over supply of PhD problem as well.
- altotrees 9y ago
  The oversupply problem is one that doesn't seem to be going away ay time soon, especially in the pure sciences. From my anecdotal evidence, it seems to be harder and harder to get into academia or cross into industry each year. I have multiple bio and chemistry PhD friends who have been either stuck in limbo at a postdoc position or who have left the field in frustration. I wonder if it will correct over time, or if the glut or PhD's will continue to grow.
  - sage76 9y ago
    Is it the same in CS as far as industry positions are concerned?
    - altotrees 9y ago
      Not from what I have read or heard. There still seems to be a need across the board for those with deep knowledge, especially when it comes to certain topics. The people I have known who have had trouble, and studies I have read about the topic point mainly to biology and chemistry as the two hardest fields to break initially with a PhD. But of course even that could change depending on specialization, etc.
      - sage76 9y ago
        Among those doctoral graduates who went to North American industry and for whom the type of industry position was known, about 60 percent took research positions . source : http://cra.org/crn/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/05/2016-Taulbee-Survey.pdf http://cra.org/crn/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/05/2016-T... Is 60% pretty high compared to other fields?
    - neuromantik8086 9y ago
      CS and Econ PhD programs both benefit from an extreme amount of cross-pollination between academia and industry. The ability to jump ship from the academy isn't nearly as large of an issue as it is in the sciences (with the exception of physics perhaps). The humanities are mostly screwed. Source (for econ at least; CS is anecdotal): http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/if-you-get-phd-get-economics-phd.html http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2013/05/if-you-get-phd-ge...
  - neuromantik8086 9y ago
    Meanwhile, there's been a trend of major corporations closing their R&D facilities because they aren't as sexy on the quarterly balance sheets, which clearly isn't making things better.
- BeetleB 9y ago
  >I largely agree with this, but in some fields I also think it is an over supply of PhD problem as well. Looking abstractly at the "market", you are right. Asking a person on a tenure track committee why they're forcing newer hires to do a lot more than they ever had to do to get tenure, and getting that answer, is problematic. Nothing in the market is forcing the hand of the person on the committee. Nothing. It is the equivalent of "I'm being a nasty jerk because I can." The market helps in him being nasty, but it is his/her choice to be so.

godelski 9y ago

Generally, getting a PhD in a scientific field means that you contributed to science in a significant way.

sn9 9y ago

She's just summarizing the work of Cal Newport, who used it to get through an MIT PhD in Computer Science while writing a couple of books and managed to get an assistant professorship at a major university shortly after graduating. She mentioned this in her article. If you look at the daily lives of some of the greatest scientists and creatives in history, you'll find that a surprising number of them have had similarly compressed schedules. Newport's blog discusses many of them.