2 ms·

I disagree, generally it's important to get feedback often and early. Conferences and publications are an important part of the process. That is not to defend t

I disagree, generally it's important to get feedback often and early. Conferences and publications are an important part of the process. That is not to defend the salami strategies of some research labs, but science is moving to fast to wait for your deeply thought out 500 page opus dei, which likely has been obsoleted by some finding published at a conference 2 years ago that you didn't attend. I have seen the false perception a few times that a PhD is mainly about sitting down and thinking deeply for a long time without talking to anyone and then getting an eureka moment and writing it all up. This is not how most modern science is done (maybe it's still possible if you're a genius in very few select areas of mathematics). So if this is what you think a PhD is about, you're likely not going to enjoy it.

bsedlm 4y ago
there's too much science "up in the air" (to refer to the stuff that hasn't made it down to the text books) it bothers me but I cannot do anything about it (other than be bothered by it) > I have seen the false perception a few times that a PhD is mainly about sitting down and thinking deeply for a long time without talking to anyone and then getting an eureka moment and writing it all up. also, a big part of the complaint from the linked and removed original blogpost is precisely the lack of being able to find people with whom to discuss. His advisors are not knowledgeable enough, (blog author claims) further, they advised them not to require so much in-depth knowledge in their thesis (!!).