5 ms·

This is the perfect article to be submitted to HN. Because it brings out the worst in HN. The saturated, self-congratulatory, better-than-thou crowd that is smu

by rmk2 14y ago

This is the perfect article to be submitted to HN. Because it brings out the worst in HN. The saturated, self-congratulatory, better-than-thou crowd that is smug about their income, prospects and worth. Many here already believe that everything that isn't programming or engineering is virtually worthless and should be killed. This reinforces them. But credit where credit is due: Academia, especially in the humanities, is everything but cosy. There is little money in it, there are few available positions. However, being a slight bit along the same way as the author, I can only relay what I see around me every day. From the group of PhD students around me, how many hold any illusions as to what academia means? None that I have met. Out of a group of ~10 people, some almost finished, some at the beginning (this is not in the US, so everyone has done a masters or equivalent before), nobody wants to become a professor. One wants to become (and judging by how she's doing, she will be) a curator, I see people interested in broadcasting, teaching (as in: school), publishing and politics. It might be different in the US, I do not know. But here, it is painfully obvious to everyone I meet as to what the chances are to land a faculty position. Do I care? To a degree (no pun intended). Would I like to go into academia? Yes. Do I know what that means? Yes. I write quickly, I enjoy a wide range of topics, I don't mind giving talks etc. I am flexible. Would I have to move if I wanted to go down that route? Yes. Does that bother me? No, it really doesn't. I will give it its fair shot, I will finish the PhD, and I will have a look around for post-doc positions. If it doesn't work? Fair enough, publishing or IT or something else it is. I am not terribly bothered about money, not because I am somehow well off, but because I do not particularly care. I don't need that much to be happy. As long as I will be able to buy books and music here and there, go out every now and then and have a somewhat nice flat somewhere, I will be fine. I would like to be able to have dog, though. I don't understand the vitriol on HN, I really don't. Everytime the humanities come up, there are the same type of comments, comparing software development entry salaries to professors, talking about student debt etc. Many here seem to be incapable (or unwilling) to even acknowledge that their own set of values is not universal, that not everybody wants to make it or even cares about making it. In many ways, I qualify for things here, I dabble in programming, I use LaTeX/Emacs/org-mode for all my work, I use Linux permanently, write my own shell-scripts, report bugs etc. That does not mean I would necessarily like to be a programmer. HN is obsessed with making money and in doing so forgets that not everyone shares the same worldview. I'm sure I will be fine. I do not have any student debt, I will start doing whatever it is I will be doing with a clean slate, I owe no money and I see my experiences as everything but lost time. I love what I am doing, and It would be a pity to give it up. If I have to, I will, but until then, I'll see where it'll take me. P.S.: I'm doing German now (though I have done other European languages before). Just like the original author. Her choice of topic probably didn't help her overall feelings about her position, either. Kafka is one of those authors about whom so much has been done that it is hard to approach him without a huge amount of preconceptions. e: syntax

unimpressive 14y ago
The best part is people trying to justify their or somebody elses strange majors as being somehow useful to the goal of producing software. Is it really that hard to admit that you did something expensive because it was kind of fun?
bd_at_rivenhill 14y ago
Before getting a PhD, you should consider that this might make you less qualified than someone holding a bachelors or masters degree. As the author states, academia breaks you down and remakes you in its image, which will make it harder for potential employers to break you down and remake you in theirs, and they generally know that. Unless I was running a research lab, I would prefer to hire someone with a master level of education before a PhD unless the research topic involved building something.
- rmk2 14y ago
  I am already in the midst of it. Regardless, the PhD is not meant to build vocational skills. However, you usually find humanities PhDs in all walks of life, simply because they do teach you some things: In doing it, you are mostly on your own. No research lab, no research group, just you, a supervisor and maybe some discussion groups debating general topics and questions. What does a PhD entail? Self-sufficient, independent work. The hardest part of a humanities PhD are continuous motivation, time management, structure, reading and writing. Humanities PhDs are fundamentally different from science PhDs, they set people up differently, teach different skills and have different requirements.
michael_miller 14y ago
Very well said. At the risk of taking away from your original point, going into academia (especially a non-engineering field) can give you a very different perspective and release you from the tech mindset. As an example, the CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, has a PhD in German social philosophy. How the hell did he end up leading a billion-dollar tech company? Basically he was really smart, and his PhD gave him the framework to think about privacy and civil liberties concerns, something the company desperately needed. The humanities often give us the scaffolding we need to answer really hard social problems which are neglected by the tech community, but are extremely important.

by rmk2 14y ago

unimpressive 14y ago

The best part is people trying to justify their or somebody elses strange majors as being somehow useful to the goal of producing software. Is it really that hard to admit that you did something expensive because it was kind of fun?

bd_at_rivenhill 14y ago

Before getting a PhD, you should consider that this might make you less qualified than someone holding a bachelors or masters degree. As the author states, academia breaks you down and remakes you in its image, which will make it harder for potential employers to break you down and remake you in theirs, and they generally know that. Unless I was running a research lab, I would prefer to hire someone with a master level of education before a PhD unless the research topic involved building something.

rmk2 14y ago
I am already in the midst of it. Regardless, the PhD is not meant to build vocational skills. However, you usually find humanities PhDs in all walks of life, simply because they do teach you some things: In doing it, you are mostly on your own. No research lab, no research group, just you, a supervisor and maybe some discussion groups debating general topics and questions. What does a PhD entail? Self-sufficient, independent work. The hardest part of a humanities PhD are continuous motivation, time management, structure, reading and writing. Humanities PhDs are fundamentally different from science PhDs, they set people up differently, teach different skills and have different requirements.

michael_miller 14y ago

Very well said. At the risk of taking away from your original point, going into academia (especially a non-engineering field) can give you a very different perspective and release you from the tech mindset. As an example, the CEO of Palantir, Alex Karp, has a PhD in German social philosophy. How the hell did he end up leading a billion-dollar tech company? Basically he was really smart, and his PhD gave him the framework to think about privacy and civil liberties concerns, something the company desperately needed. The humanities often give us the scaffolding we need to answer really hard social problems which are neglected by the tech community, but are extremely important.