6 ms·

Thank you for asking this. I stated something to the same effect here too and think the same way as you. From what I have seen, the answer is that academics ar

by maegul 4y ago

Thank you for asking this. I stated something to the same effect here too and think the same way as you. From what I have seen, the answer is that academics are more or less like teachers’ pets that kept going all the way into tenure. Their whole professional being is directed at pleasing their peers at large or their superiors. They’ve been broken into a relatively harsh hierarchical way of relating to their profession. All of their intelligence has been well domesticated and easily controlled for a while now. And it’s not like they’re starving. They’re doing well, but not too well, and scarcely have any incentive to rock the boat while they’re family rely on them and become increasingly reliant on the academic career with their age making it harder and harder to fathom surviving in the real world. Just think about the amount of time and energy they have to spend on grants to get permission to do their job through sales pitches and papers to promote themselves. They’re like an influencer that has to re-apply for their job every three years, with the real risk of falling out of fashion every time all the while acquiring few real world skills, which looms hauntingly should the fate, that’s inevitable for most, of being cast out into it befall them.

TapWaterBandit 4y ago
Yep. Academics like Jordan Peterson who raise a middle finger to the world are outliers, not the norm. And his success isn't really to do with ground-level institution building but leveraging social media to spread a message (he is more like a preacher than an academic in most ways).
thaumasiotes 4y ago
> They’re like an influencer that has to re-apply for their job every three years, with the real risk of falling out of fashion every time I don't really understand the message of this comparison. An influencer must do this every day. Are you saying professors have really cushy jobs? That's a common message, but it doesn't seem to fit the rest of your comment.
- maegul 4y ago
  Well it may be a poor metaphor! The idea was that an influencer doesn't (AFAIK) have to really apply for their job. They have a profile and platform and are their own brand (again, AFAIK), and apart from whatever advertising contracts they have, I imagine they're not beholden to any one employer. Their work, seems to me to be in keeping up their profile with constant activity and promotion. As an academic who does research that requires funding, you need grants. These grants are often referred to as the lottery because it's not always clear why some get accepted and others don't. If an academic doesn't get a grant one year, especially for two years in a row, they'll fall behind in their ability to do research and publish and risk being kicked out of the industry. Sure, an academic could try to move country for a new funding agency, but that's getting prohibitively disruptive and unlikely. This is the bit that I don't think influencers have to go through. All of this, if you want the best people doing research, sounds good, right. Except, remember the "lottery" part above, and also that making good/interesting/exciting discoveries involves a good amount of luck that often doesn't translate to a greater likelihood of making discoveries in the future (senior academics have admitted this to me in private). And so researchers have to influencer-like work in promoting themselves by finding ways to be constantly publishing papers.
sseagull 4y ago
The is needlessly condescending and an over generalization. The answer is that, like pretty much everything in society, collective action is hard for a variety of reasons. It’s a simple problem, but with no simple solutions. But I suppose academics should have just asked you what to do, since you’ve got it figured out.
- maegul 4y ago
  > The is needlessly condescending and an over generalization. I take your point, and clearly my tone was intended to be somewhat strident. I'm not sure it is needless, though. The university and academic systems, IMO, are problematic but enjoy a special monopolistic prestige branding. Assaulting this and letting those that enjoy the privilege of working in the University system know that their positions, roles and actions and even values are more problematic than the "oh wow, that most be so interesting and you must be so smart" reactions they can get in social settings ... can, IMO, be helpful to the general situation. > The answer is that, like pretty much everything in society, collective action is hard for a variety of reasons. It’s a simple problem, but with no simple solutions. I agree. But part of my point, and perhaps too implicitly, was that it seems that it is harder in academia than other areas for the reasons I touched on. From my experience, senior academics (who have had some idealism knocked out of them) would consider anything collective or for the greater good of academia and research less than those in other fields.
- ShredKazoo 4y ago
  >collective action is hard for a variety of reasons Seems like the admin manages to do it against the scholars right? I do think there's something interesting here to explain.
ShredKazoo 4y ago
>They’re like an influencer that has to re-apply for their job every three years I thought tenure was supposed to solve this?
- bell-cot 4y ago
  The Administrators are busy optimizing away that pesky "tenure" stuff, percent by percent.
ehvatum 4y ago
> They’re doing well, but not too well, and scarcely have any incentive to rock the boat... Just think about the amount of time and energy they have to spend on grants to get permission to do their job through sales pitches and papers to promote themselves. We shouldn't be afraid to reach out to local laboratory research groups who produce interesting papers. Even if they don't have immediate need of your time, money, or expertise, they probably know many groups where you would be gratefully welcome to pitch in and recognized appropriately.

by maegul 4y ago

TapWaterBandit 4y ago

Yep. Academics like Jordan Peterson who raise a middle finger to the world are outliers, not the norm. And his success isn't really to do with ground-level institution building but leveraging social media to spread a message (he is more like a preacher than an academic in most ways).

thaumasiotes 4y ago

> They’re like an influencer that has to re-apply for their job every three years, with the real risk of falling out of fashion every time I don't really understand the message of this comparison. An influencer must do this every day. Are you saying professors have really cushy jobs? That's a common message, but it doesn't seem to fit the rest of your comment.

maegul 4y ago
Well it may be a poor metaphor! The idea was that an influencer doesn't (AFAIK) have to really apply for their job. They have a profile and platform and are their own brand (again, AFAIK), and apart from whatever advertising contracts they have, I imagine they're not beholden to any one employer. Their work, seems to me to be in keeping up their profile with constant activity and promotion. As an academic who does research that requires funding, you need grants. These grants are often referred to as the lottery because it's not always clear why some get accepted and others don't. If an academic doesn't get a grant one year, especially for two years in a row, they'll fall behind in their ability to do research and publish and risk being kicked out of the industry. Sure, an academic could try to move country for a new funding agency, but that's getting prohibitively disruptive and unlikely. This is the bit that I don't think influencers have to go through. All of this, if you want the best people doing research, sounds good, right. Except, remember the "lottery" part above, and also that making good/interesting/exciting discoveries involves a good amount of luck that often doesn't translate to a greater likelihood of making discoveries in the future (senior academics have admitted this to me in private). And so researchers have to influencer-like work in promoting themselves by finding ways to be constantly publishing papers.

sseagull 4y ago

The is needlessly condescending and an over generalization. The answer is that, like pretty much everything in society, collective action is hard for a variety of reasons. It’s a simple problem, but with no simple solutions. But I suppose academics should have just asked you what to do, since you’ve got it figured out.

maegul 4y ago
> The is needlessly condescending and an over generalization. I take your point, and clearly my tone was intended to be somewhat strident. I'm not sure it is needless, though. The university and academic systems, IMO, are problematic but enjoy a special monopolistic prestige branding. Assaulting this and letting those that enjoy the privilege of working in the University system know that their positions, roles and actions and even values are more problematic than the "oh wow, that most be so interesting and you must be so smart" reactions they can get in social settings ... can, IMO, be helpful to the general situation. > The answer is that, like pretty much everything in society, collective action is hard for a variety of reasons. It’s a simple problem, but with no simple solutions. I agree. But part of my point, and perhaps too implicitly, was that it seems that it is harder in academia than other areas for the reasons I touched on. From my experience, senior academics (who have had some idealism knocked out of them) would consider anything collective or for the greater good of academia and research less than those in other fields.
ShredKazoo 4y ago
>collective action is hard for a variety of reasons Seems like the admin manages to do it against the scholars right? I do think there's something interesting here to explain.

ShredKazoo 4y ago

>They’re like an influencer that has to re-apply for their job every three years I thought tenure was supposed to solve this?

bell-cot 4y ago
The Administrators are busy optimizing away that pesky "tenure" stuff, percent by percent.

ehvatum 4y ago

> They’re doing well, but not too well, and scarcely have any incentive to rock the boat... Just think about the amount of time and energy they have to spend on grants to get permission to do their job through sales pitches and papers to promote themselves. We shouldn't be afraid to reach out to local laboratory research groups who produce interesting papers. Even if they don't have immediate need of your time, money, or expertise, they probably know many groups where you would be gratefully welcome to pitch in and recognized appropriately.