The Student Room Group

What motivated you to pursue a PhD?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80
Original post by Jimbo1234
X


Hah! You know, you're quite right: I neglected a further category.

D. Student Whohe.

Monomaniacal to the extreme, Whohe's decision to study for a PhD was less a choice and more an inevitable consequence of his, for Whohe is nearly always a he, unchecked mental illness.

Thriving due to his obsessive tendencies and through having a gaping void where normal people's emotions and concerns usually live, Whohe wins some prize or another. For this he receives almost as much attention as when he dies two years later during a sordid experiment with autoerotic asphyxiation in a Bravissimo changing room.

Nevertheless, Whohe's peers still talk of his legendary dedication, and the faint odour of stale urine that always accompanied him.
Reply 81
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
3-4.


Christ on a bike, that's long! :tongue: Respect to anyone who has done or is doing one!
Reply 82
Original post by MrShifty
All three, to some extent or another (though predominantly A and B)

I'm writing up my poxy work :smile: Apparently it isn't even interesting enough for peer reviewers to get round to reading after six+ months.

A fair bit of my post was tongue in cheek, so don't be too disheartened.

That said, there is a genuine risk involved in going into a PhD with too romantic a notion of what it consists of, what it will lead to, and what it actually 'means'. Too many aspiring PhD students spend too much time worrying about whether or not they're good enough for a PhD, when in my view they should be far more hard nosed about things and spend most of their time trying to decide if a PhD is really worth the time, effort, hassle, and potential opportunity cost.

On which note, there's always the temptation to get all misty eyed and talk about how a PhD is worth it for its own sake. For some people that might be true, but for others it's self-indulgence masquerading as idealism, and is worth guarding against.


You are right. I too worry about this. I believe the results of Medicine/Science research are more vital for most of the people. And it makes my research look so silly. Because, those researchers may end up in some ground breaking discovery. Whereas, my potential PhD is in Business/Management field and I worry that the outcome of my research won't be soo new and essential.
So, I would like to produce articles throughout these 3-4 years rather than just publish 1 work in the end in order to justify my research on a monthly basis.

As for my motivations to do a PhD... My current choices are limited, because it's really difficult to find a job which will be in the same field as my potential PhD.
All current job opportunities involve only administrative things with no strategic level thinking/decision making. Whereas, my potential PhD will allow me to research the fields which I find so interesting and emerging (business trends), that is, it will allow me to be the innovator and it may create some business contacts with the companies that are interested in my research. :colondollar::rolleyes:

So, I'm really hopeful that a PhD is worth my time and the effort. So, currently the opportunity cost for me is nonexistent.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 83
Original post by MrShifty
Hah! You know, you're quite right: I neglected a further category.

D. Student Whohe.

Monomaniacal to the extreme, Whohe's decision to study for a PhD was less a choice and more an inevitable consequence of his, for Whohe is nearly always a he, unchecked mental illness.

Thriving due to his obsessive tendencies and through having a gaping void where normal people's emotions and concerns usually live, Whohe wins some prize or another. For this he receives almost as much attention as when he dies two years later during a sordid experiment with autoerotic asphyxiation in a Bravissimo changing room.

Nevertheless, Whohe's peers still talk of his legendary dedication, and the faint odour of stale urine that always accompanied him.


you should write a book
Original post by MrShifty
Hah! You know, you're quite right: I neglected a further category.

D. Student Whohe.

Monomaniacal to the extreme, Whohe's decision to study for a PhD was less a choice and more an inevitable consequence of his, for Whohe is nearly always a he, unchecked mental illness.

Thriving due to his obsessive tendencies and through having a gaping void where normal people's emotions and concerns usually live, Whohe wins some prize or another. For this he receives almost as much attention as when he dies two years later during a sordid experiment with autoerotic asphyxiation in a Bravissimo changing room.

Nevertheless, Whohe's peers still talk of his legendary dedication, and the faint odour of stale urine that always accompanied him.


****ing brilliant! :rofl:
Original post by KCosmo
Christ on a bike, that's long! :tongue: Respect to anyone who has done or is doing one!


Only as long as a first degree :lolwut: And actually its pretty rushed; the typical length is 5-7 years in the US.
Reply 86
Original post by Jimbo1234
A stupid mistake to make by anyone to be honest.
Any PhD grad should know that they are going to spend every waking minute on 1 single topic.


This is potentially a big mistake; at least it is in my discipline (maths). You need to spend at least some of your time broadening your horizons alongside working on your research topic.
Reply 87
Original post by MrShifty
Hah! You know, you're quite right: I neglected a further category.


And another...

Student Imsoeffinclever

ISEC as he/she is known for short was bullied at school. Socially awkward amongst a mixed crowd; ISEC decided early on that he/she was going to reign supreme amongst the geeks. During their undergrad, they spurned the 'lower' opportunities for friendships and good times and worked hard on their course and their pretensions of self importance. ISEC is modestly intelligent but is under the delusion that he/she is an insightful genious of highest order. He/she goes on to do a PhD essentially because it is the only arena in life in which they are able to compete. Only they aren't actually that much of a competetive force within their discipline; they drastically overestimate the worth and impact of their tentative apprenticework that forms their thesis. They use their PhD as a form of self validation and endlessly self promote themselves amongst family and friends. They think that academic research is the only endeavour in the world that utilises true intelligence and creativity. They fail to see that their work is just mundane cookie-cutter methodology diligently applied to a yet relatively untouched niche.

Seriously, go to an academic department or to an academic conference. They are full of egos that need validation and massaging and academia is the only place they can get that emotional satisfaction.
Reply 88
Original post by Craghyrax
Only as long as a first degree :lolwut: And actually its pretty rushed; the typical length is 5-7 years in the US.


It's not long in itself, but when added to the time spent doing an undergraduate degree, then a masters, then a Phd it's a long time. How long would it typically be from starting an undergraduate degree to finishing your Phd?
Reply 89
Original post by KCosmo
It's not long in itself, but when added to the time spent doing an undergraduate degree, then a masters, then a Phd it's a long time. How long would it typically be from starting an undergraduate degree to finishing your Phd?


Typically around 8 years (assuming no breaks) in the UK. Seven years would be quick but not unfeasible (3 year undergrad straight into 4 years of PhD for example)
Original post by KCosmo
It's not long in itself, but when added to the time spent doing an undergraduate degree, then a masters, then a Phd it's a long time. How long would it typically be from starting an undergraduate degree to finishing your Phd?

That's true, however its no different to training as an architect, vet or doctor! And it makes sense to think of it as similar, because in all of these cases the reason for the length of training is the need to become highly specialised in a particular field :smile:

In the UK from the start of undergrad to the end of a PhD it would usually be 7 or 8 years. In Arts and most Social Sciences you would have a three year BA, a one year MA or equivalent, and then a 3 year PhD (most people spill over into a fourth year because you have to be very organised to finish in 3). In the Sciences you are more likely to have done a four year undergraduate degree, which means that you don't need to study a Masters course before progressing to PhD. Many scientists with three year BScs go onto a four year PhD which incorporates training in the first year that makes up for doing a Masters.

Of course many people have breaks and don't go straight through. Its common for PhD students to have had a bit of work experience, and some choose to pursue postgraduate study after having already established a career.

Hope that helps.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 91
Original post by Jimbo1234
A stupid mistake to make by anyone to be honest.
Any PhD grad should know that they are going to spend every waking minute on 1 single topic.



Mmm - think there's probably a good number of people who think they'd enjoy that before they start actually having to do it. same as a lot of other things really.

anyway I'm pretty doubtful anyone spends the entire 37 hours per week (or whatever) flat out grinding the thesis anyway let alone 'every waking minute'
Reply 92
Original post by Jake22
And another...

Student Imsoeffinclever...

Seriously, go to an academic department or to an academic conference. They are full of egos that need validation and massaging and academia is the only place they can get that emotional satisfaction.


Oh, I know the type. The kind who always looks as if they're sneering, even when they're not or even when they have their back to you, and who:

only ever discusses their work in terms of technical babble that they know full well most people wont understand;

is the master of interrupting a conversation or a formal presentation with some banal observation or correction and using it as a launch pad for a monumental digression that serves no purpose other than giving them a chance to hear their own voice.




Apropos of absolutely nothing, this kind of illustrates why I can't stand PhD comics. Apart from the fact that the characters look like they're all related to Inspector Gadget, everyone's so wholesome and inoffensively kooky that it makes academia look like an extended episode of Friends. It completely neglects the aspects which sometimes make it a nightmarish land of disappointment and passive aggressive arsebags :wink:
Reply 93
My God... thank goodness the institution that I'm working with doesn't cost much; in terms of fees that is. I can't imagine those who do/did their PhD overseas and finding/ended up hating it and have/had to pay astronomical international fees!!
Reply 94
Original post by MrShifty
Oh, I know the type. The kind who always looks as if they're sneering, even when they're not or even when they have their back to you, and who:

only ever discusses their work in terms of technical babble that they know full well most people wont understand;

is the master of interrupting a conversation or a formal presentation with some banal observation or correction and using it as a launch pad for a monumental digression that serves no purpose other than giving them a chance to hear their own voice.




My favourite instance of the second point was at a talk where the speaker was making some background comments and reminding the audience of some basic facts about 'something' (fin dim irreps of semisimple Lie Algebras) and then said something like 'anyway, that's what we all already knew so let's now talk about...' before being interrupted by an audience member who said "Well, seeing as we all know it - let's do it properly" and then actually stood up and made the poor guy go back through his boards correcting typos and minor inconsistencies and the like. He basically wasted a good five-ten minutes or more on detail that was not going to be important in what followed.

It completely neglects the aspects which sometimes make it a nightmarish land of disappointment and passive aggressive arsebags :wink:


After meeting with a fair few American PhD students at conferences and so forth - it left me wondering... are they often more emotionally and socially balanced then English PhD students?
Reply 95
Original post by Jake22
before being interrupted by an audience member who said "Well, seeing as we all know it - let's do it properly" and then actually stood up and made the poor guy go back through his boards correcting typos and minor inconsistencies and the like. He basically wasted a good five-ten minutes or more on detail that was not going to be important in what followed.




:eek4:
Reply 96
Original post by Jake22
...an audience member who said "Well, seeing as we all know it - let's do it properly"


Oh dear god that's awful.

I remember one seminar that was hosted by a fresh postdoc who was clearly nervous and had obviously spent an awful lot of time on their presentation. About ten or fifteen minutes into their talk, he was interrupted by one academic asking a question only tangentially related to the subject matter, which was almost immediately answered by another sat a couple of rows back. Those two then loudly continued their discussion, getting further and further away from the point for at least a good five minutes whilst the speaker shuffled about uncomfortably at the lectern, pretending to rifle through their notes, and being made to look like a right plum.

It was a pretty sorry spectacle, to say the least.


After meeting with a fair few American PhD students at conferences and so forth - it left me wondering... are they often more emotionally and socially balanced then English PhD students?


I would say that in the main that's very true, and that European students tend to be a bit more sensible and stable as well.

I don't know for sure why this is, but I'd hazard that age and maturity plays a role, as does the difference between the various education systems.

To be brief, the British educational system and academic culture, with its inordinate emphasis on early specialization, rapid progression to the PhD, and the dominance of just a few universities seems more liable to produce students and scholars who are under developed, hypercompetitive and bordering on hothouse orchid territory. I'd go as far as to say it's not even a particularly good educational system either. In my experience, Americans and Europeans seem to have a much broader intellectual 'comfort zone' than we do, whereas we come accross as spending much of our time 'winging it' within the narrow confines of our specialism.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 97
Original post by kka25
My God... thank goodness the institution that I'm working with doesn't cost much; in terms of fees that is. I can't imagine those who do/did their PhD overseas and finding/ended up hating it and have/had to pay astronomical international fees!!


You don't pay for a PhD, or shouldn't. Being admitted to a PhD without funding (in the form of scholarships or TA jobs, RA jobs or whatever) is an implicit rejection. A PhD shouldn't cost you a single penny, you are doing society a favor and deserve to be paid like for any other job.
Reply 98
Original post by kka25
My God... thank goodness the institution that I'm working with doesn't cost much; in terms of fees that is. I can't imagine those who do/did their PhD overseas and finding/ended up hating it and have/had to pay astronomical international fees!!


Everything costs in life. It is what it is. What is important is that you have contributed something that people will you remember you by (hopefully!). In any case, you're a Dr. :biggrin: I don't care about people's skepticism. People have survived it. I will too.
Reply 99
Original post by harmony_01
Everything costs in life. It is what it is. What is important is that you have contributed something that people will you remember you by (hopefully!). In any case, you're a Dr. :biggrin: I don't care about people's skepticism. People have survived it. I will too.


There are only two contexts in which the title should really be used:

i) If you are lecturing or communicating with students - in which case... it makes little to no difference as they often don't understand the different titles anyway. I have taught at university level and have no title yet get called everything from mr to dr. to professor

ii) In academic circles, in which case everyone else will either be a doctor or have a higher rank. Being proud about being a doctor in that setting is like a junior officer running around the mess hall telling everyone he is second lieutenant.

Using an academic (or military) rank or title out of context has the unfortunate effect of making people sound like pricks - even if they aren't.

To be fair - it is a pretty fatuous thing to do.

Quick Reply

Latest