5 ms·

Seems like this should be titled "Humanities Academia is a cult". Which is a conclusion with which I don't necessarily disagree. Frankly, the job numbers are ou

Seems like this should be titled "Humanities Academia is a cult". Which is a conclusion with which I don't necessarily disagree. Frankly, the job numbers are out there. If you choose to get a PhD in history even after seeing them, you're probably delusional in some form. I'm not so certain about STEM however. While cults can pop up anywhere there is a leader with a non trivial power dynamic, I'd say that a fair portion of professors in STEM will happily explain to you the harsh reality of academia and discourage you from getting a PhD. Furthermore, there are jobs outside of academia for PhDs, so there's a lot less lock in.

BadassFractal 8y ago
Seems aligned with recent experiments with publishing garbage papers in, allegedly reputable, soft sciences journals: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/10/10/grievance-studies-academia-fake-feminist-hypatia-mein-kampf-racism-column/1575219002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/10/10/gri.... The concept of "idea laundering" is fascinating. It seems that, as of today, the incentives of the academics are simply misaligned with the those of the public.
closeparen 8y ago
Science and math are as unemployable as the humanities. When people use "STEM" in this way they really only mean engineering.
- BadassFractal 8y ago
  I've seen math / physics majors make an easy transition into software development. I bet that is much easier to pull off than switching to programming from say, sociology.
  - closeparen 8y ago
    Okay, but the employable activity there is still software development and not science or mathematics.
    - BadassFractal 8y ago
      That is true.
    - dddddaviddddd 8y ago
      Software is often a tool to perform science.
    - analog31 8y ago
      Most math and science students are aware that we aren't headed for academic research careers in those fields. But that's true for computer science students as well. I have a physics degree, and while I'm not employed as a programmer per se, programming is my main problem solving tool. It wouldn't be a quantum leap for me to move into a programming job if I wanted to do it. On the other hand, I also have two friends whose college degrees were in philosophy and music performance, and both became programmers.
  - electricslpnsld 8y ago
    > I bet that is much easier to pull off than switching to programming from say, sociology. Sociology curricula are getting quite quantitative these days — the jump from sociology student to data scientist isn’t that far. I used to live with a bunch of sociologists back in grad school, and they lived and breathed R, Python, and SAS.
  - fnrslvr 8y ago
    Is this a regional thing? I've had interviewers inquire perplexedly from across the table as to why in the world someone with a mathematics degree was seeking a software development job. Do employers in some parts really salivate over green math/phys grads with not so much as a github profile? Or do these anecdata leave off some key arc to the story where the grad does something substantial to bridge the gap between said major and software dev?
    - BadassFractal 8y ago
      Many employers don't care what your degree is as long as you can prove you can code what they need you to code.
- pkaye 8y ago
  Engineering is more immediately applicable. For science and math you need to go much further in your education if you want to pursue a career in the their fields.
- icelancer 8y ago
  If you mean within academia, I agree. If you mean in the private sector, absolutely not. Mathematics and physics majors have a ton of opportunity in CS-related fields. I hired a lot of them when I ran a data science team. Their understanding of software development from first principles usually seriously outranks CS graduates at the cost of not knowing how to program in advanced languages. I find it a lot easier to develop a Math/Physics graduate's coding skills than a CS graduate's underlying understanding of the physical world and formulaic thinking.
  - closeparen 8y ago
    Okay, people trained in science can more easily transition to software engineering. They are still not getting paid to do science.
    - icelancer 8y ago
      This all depends on what you consider science, I suppose. If you define science as work with beakers and things, sure, yeah, those positions are dying out. But genetic research is more of a CS-dominated field than it is a purely "scientific" field these days. nVidia pays technical geneticists mid-six figures to work on their projects. Science is becoming more democratized and breaking out of the academic, federally-funded, very slow process model, and plenty of people are working in private science that have nothing to do with making drugs, but rather in brand new fields and exploding existing niche ones. Some of this isn't great, I'll be the first to admit with a lot of experience on both sides of the aisle. But overall it's a massive net positive. For everyone.
    - tnecniv 8y ago
      If you would like to be pedantic, only a small percentage of individuals use the skills taught to them in their major (or any traditional classroom setting really) in their daily job. The value of a classical education is that the student learns critical thinking and problem solving in a diverse set of frameworks, which allows them to adapt to the requirements of the job.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Other people mention software engineering in comments, but last time I heard, investment bankers would hire mathematicians, then physicists, and only then software people.
maceurt 8y ago
Music academia is terrible and riddled with politics and infighting from my experience also. The number of actual livable jobs for classical musicians are very low. It makes me pissed off how public schools will still spend hundred of thousands of dollars and push kids into classical music when it is such a dead end, and competition is so high. It is a ponzi scheme where the students pay the teachers, then the students become teachers and the cycle starts over again. Barely anybody who does not play an instrument ever listens to classical music it is a joke. The least selling genre of music in the United States behind jazz.
- dddddaviddddd 8y ago
  Participating in music is personally fulfilling, but unlikely to give financial flexibility. Schools should emphasize the role that it will realistically play in students' lives.
  - analog31 8y ago
    This is definitely the emphasis in music education at the K-12 level, and to a growing extent at the college level as well. I came across this page recently: https://www.music.wisc.edu/areas/jazz-studies/ https://www.music.wisc.edu/areas/jazz-studies/ Note that it drops a pretty strong hint that you should not major in music exclusively.
- smallnamespace 8y ago
  > It is a ponzi scheme where the students pay the teachers, then the students become teachers and the cycle starts over again. Barely anybody who does not play an instrument ever listens to classical music it is a joke Or, this is the normal way traditional arts and crafts of all sorts are transmitted through the generations? It's not a Ponzi scheme unless it promises supranormal exponential growth. I learned a classical instrument and it taught me many lessons that I don't I would've learned elsewhere (or at least not until much, much later in life): - rote repetition and practice isn't sexy, but it works and will lead to steady improvement, no matter how bad you are initially - there is an effective technique to rote practice, and you can put it to use for any skill that you wish to acquire - failing many times is part of the road to success These are all skills that are very applicable to software developers as well. I'm sure there are people who tried very hard to become classical musicians and now regret that choice, and perhaps some resent those who encouraged them along that path, but I never expected to become a professional and continue to happily play in my free time. Same goes for many of my music acquaintances.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
nunyobiznaz 8y ago
I have a PhD in theoretical physics. The only reason I found transitioning to software easy was because I had been writing software my entire life anyway. Am I better or even as good as the engineers who have 6 years experience on me? I don't think I am. Time will tell if I outpace them. I no longer hold delusions and overly romantic notions of what academic science is. If I have one advantage, it is that I have no doubts as to my career path. I am a very indecisive person, and leaving academia is one thing in my life I am sure was a good choice.

BadassFractal 8y ago

Seems aligned with recent experiments with publishing garbage papers in, allegedly reputable, soft sciences journals: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/10/10/grievance-studies-academia-fake-feminist-hypatia-mein-kampf-racism-column/1575219002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2018/10/10/gri.... The concept of "idea laundering" is fascinating. It seems that, as of today, the incentives of the academics are simply misaligned with the those of the public.

closeparen 8y ago

Science and math are as unemployable as the humanities. When people use "STEM" in this way they really only mean engineering.

BadassFractal 8y ago
I've seen math / physics majors make an easy transition into software development. I bet that is much easier to pull off than switching to programming from say, sociology.
- closeparen 8y ago
  Okay, but the employable activity there is still software development and not science or mathematics.
  - BadassFractal 8y ago
    That is true.
  - dddddaviddddd 8y ago
    Software is often a tool to perform science.
  - analog31 8y ago
    Most math and science students are aware that we aren't headed for academic research careers in those fields. But that's true for computer science students as well. I have a physics degree, and while I'm not employed as a programmer per se, programming is my main problem solving tool. It wouldn't be a quantum leap for me to move into a programming job if I wanted to do it. On the other hand, I also have two friends whose college degrees were in philosophy and music performance, and both became programmers.
- electricslpnsld 8y ago
  > I bet that is much easier to pull off than switching to programming from say, sociology. Sociology curricula are getting quite quantitative these days — the jump from sociology student to data scientist isn’t that far. I used to live with a bunch of sociologists back in grad school, and they lived and breathed R, Python, and SAS.
- fnrslvr 8y ago
  Is this a regional thing? I've had interviewers inquire perplexedly from across the table as to why in the world someone with a mathematics degree was seeking a software development job. Do employers in some parts really salivate over green math/phys grads with not so much as a github profile? Or do these anecdata leave off some key arc to the story where the grad does something substantial to bridge the gap between said major and software dev?
  - BadassFractal 8y ago
    Many employers don't care what your degree is as long as you can prove you can code what they need you to code.
pkaye 8y ago
Engineering is more immediately applicable. For science and math you need to go much further in your education if you want to pursue a career in the their fields.
icelancer 8y ago
If you mean within academia, I agree. If you mean in the private sector, absolutely not. Mathematics and physics majors have a ton of opportunity in CS-related fields. I hired a lot of them when I ran a data science team. Their understanding of software development from first principles usually seriously outranks CS graduates at the cost of not knowing how to program in advanced languages. I find it a lot easier to develop a Math/Physics graduate's coding skills than a CS graduate's underlying understanding of the physical world and formulaic thinking.
- closeparen 8y ago
  Okay, people trained in science can more easily transition to software engineering. They are still not getting paid to do science.
  - icelancer 8y ago
    This all depends on what you consider science, I suppose. If you define science as work with beakers and things, sure, yeah, those positions are dying out. But genetic research is more of a CS-dominated field than it is a purely "scientific" field these days. nVidia pays technical geneticists mid-six figures to work on their projects. Science is becoming more democratized and breaking out of the academic, federally-funded, very slow process model, and plenty of people are working in private science that have nothing to do with making drugs, but rather in brand new fields and exploding existing niche ones. Some of this isn't great, I'll be the first to admit with a lot of experience on both sides of the aisle. But overall it's a massive net positive. For everyone.
  - tnecniv 8y ago
    If you would like to be pedantic, only a small percentage of individuals use the skills taught to them in their major (or any traditional classroom setting really) in their daily job. The value of a classical education is that the student learns critical thinking and problem solving in a diverse set of frameworks, which allows them to adapt to the requirements of the job.
TeMPOraL 8y ago
Other people mention software engineering in comments, but last time I heard, investment bankers would hire mathematicians, then physicists, and only then software people.

maceurt 8y ago

Music academia is terrible and riddled with politics and infighting from my experience also. The number of actual livable jobs for classical musicians are very low. It makes me pissed off how public schools will still spend hundred of thousands of dollars and push kids into classical music when it is such a dead end, and competition is so high. It is a ponzi scheme where the students pay the teachers, then the students become teachers and the cycle starts over again. Barely anybody who does not play an instrument ever listens to classical music it is a joke. The least selling genre of music in the United States behind jazz.

dddddaviddddd 8y ago
Participating in music is personally fulfilling, but unlikely to give financial flexibility. Schools should emphasize the role that it will realistically play in students' lives.
- analog31 8y ago
  This is definitely the emphasis in music education at the K-12 level, and to a growing extent at the college level as well. I came across this page recently: https://www.music.wisc.edu/areas/jazz-studies/ https://www.music.wisc.edu/areas/jazz-studies/ Note that it drops a pretty strong hint that you should not major in music exclusively.
smallnamespace 8y ago
> It is a ponzi scheme where the students pay the teachers, then the students become teachers and the cycle starts over again. Barely anybody who does not play an instrument ever listens to classical music it is a joke Or, this is the normal way traditional arts and crafts of all sorts are transmitted through the generations? It's not a Ponzi scheme unless it promises supranormal exponential growth. I learned a classical instrument and it taught me many lessons that I don't I would've learned elsewhere (or at least not until much, much later in life): - rote repetition and practice isn't sexy, but it works and will lead to steady improvement, no matter how bad you are initially - there is an effective technique to rote practice, and you can put it to use for any skill that you wish to acquire - failing many times is part of the road to success These are all skills that are very applicable to software developers as well. I'm sure there are people who tried very hard to become classical musicians and now regret that choice, and perhaps some resent those who encouraged them along that path, but I never expected to become a professional and continue to happily play in my free time. Same goes for many of my music acquaintances.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

nunyobiznaz 8y ago

I have a PhD in theoretical physics. The only reason I found transitioning to software easy was because I had been writing software my entire life anyway. Am I better or even as good as the engineers who have 6 years experience on me? I don't think I am. Time will tell if I outpace them. I no longer hold delusions and overly romantic notions of what academic science is. If I have one advantage, it is that I have no doubts as to my career path. I am a very indecisive person, and leaving academia is one thing in my life I am sure was a good choice.