PhD Woes - Too Late?

Yeah, going right through does make things less arduous. My BA, MA and PhD theses are all linked pretty closely, so my eventual research gap was identified in nascent form before I even started my 3rd year undergraduate. It'd certainly be easier to advise had you stuck with one thing, but it's not necessarily a dealbreaker. A lot of PhD recruitment happens all year round, so application cycles and timeframes are more of a thing for funding.

In what area do the potential supervisors specialise?

Some people publish theses and have them well-received, but most of us chuck them into the repository and it'll be read by about 10 people if you're lucky. Even publishing a monograph of it doesn't really guarantee good readership or impact.

Why do you want a PhD? The motivation is really key here. If it's only to lend credibility to other projects then I think you're probably barking up the wrong tree and should just go write those other projects. Do you want to work for a university? teach? Research? Because the job market is the worst it has been in 50 years and it is very very hard to break into, harder still to keep a permanent gig, especially outside of STEM.

I don't say this to put you off, but to make sure you go in with your eyes open. I was 3 years post-PhD before I got a full time job, and even that was temporary. Now I have a permanent gig, but it's not doing exactly what I'd love to be doing and I have had to make some pretty big compromises. This is normal for a lot of academics now. I'm even after doing a nother Master's so that I can cast my net wider with an additional specialism, and I have qualifications coming out of my ears, along with ten years of experience teaching in universities and schools, and some pretty niche student support specialisms. It's very difficult.

If your heart is really set on writing for writing's sake, it might be a consideration to avoid the stresses and isolation of PhDing and just write for the wider audience. You need no PhD for that.

Thanks for the in-depth response. I appreciate it. In the most overarching sense, my project would always support a non-theistic, post-secular view of wonder and spirituality. I know exactly the kinds of literature I'd need to read further. There are many names and intellectual circles I can point toward to give my arguments proper grounding. Indeed, I've been conversing with one scholar for a long time, Patrick Curry, whose ideas formed the basis of my thesis. Despite this, I'm not sure what specific questions to ask in my area, which is a shame as I feel I've read a decent amount thus far. One day I'll consider something on the relationship between ecological ethics and narrative and another I'll consider looking at how games can change our perception of place in neoliberal society. In truth, I don't feel like I'd be able to bring anything original to such complicated subjects. I'm dreading the idea of not being able to send a proposal in by the end of next year so that I need to wait for the next window.

The PhD would lend credibility to other projects, but I would like to research, yes. However, as you say, academic employment is difficult to get into. Outside of academia, I've been considering research/writing positions for nature-oriented NGOs, which I could probably land fairly easily. However, I do have some regrets about not doing a more applicable Masters. I wasn't able to find a course specifically on environmental studies in my area, and, in all honesty, I didn't think I'd be able to jump into something like philosophy at Masters level given my BSc. Doing a standalone research Masters thesis that blended literature with philosophy seemed like a smart choice for a handful of reasons, but it does mean that I'm probably less likely to gain employment with a nature-oriented NGO, perhaps. My work in the environmental sector was primarily ecological consultancy.

I'm struggling to think of the benefits of not doing a PhD despite how difficult that route would be. There seems to be little difference between writing books for a general audience and working on a PhD other than the fact that I could probably get a book out sooner, theoretically speaking. It'd still take at least two years to write a this though, most likely, so why not just do a PhD? That's what I keep thinking. Again, I could do the PhD and then write general books after that. Best of both worlds. Maybe I'm not thinking straight, but I'd love for you or someone else to tell me why I should just focus on writing books for a general audience right this minute. At this stage, I think I have choice paralysis.

Ah, I know of Patrick Curry. I think he's at UoWales Trinity these days.

The issue you really have here is that there are no shortcuts, or if there are, I'm at a loss as to exactly what they are and how to exploit them. I don't see any real reason you'd not get onto a Master's in Philosophy because it is really unusual for phil to be required as a first degree - they usually take anybody with decent grades and an inkling of aptitude (I know because I am a philosopher!). The issue is really that it sets you back a minimum of a year (longer if part time) and you seem quite worried about timeframes. It could be worth doing, and I'd be very surprised if exploring that didn't throw up feasible PhD questions. It can be as simple as 'x has asked this question and I want to answer it differently to these other people' (my initial PhD proposal, and AHRC funding proposal, looked much like that).

What did you address in your Master's thesis? Is there a gap that you could push further, some extension of the questions asked therein? Are these academics giving pointers about narrowing down a research question?

Similarly, I have had tons and tons of students that went to work in NGOs after their Bachelor's, with middling classifications. Come of my contemporaries work in government on policy advice, also with middling classifications. I think you might be selling yourself a bit short - these places love people who have some philosophy background and you have a science-y BSc to give you the environmental bases from which your work would surely stem. It could be worth getting hold of a few people in these NGOs and seeing what the score is regarding recruitment. I believe it is quite the done thing to send speculative messages in LinkedIn now (Christ knows I receive enough of the bloody things), so perhaps worth a few hours of time?

Academia isn't the endpoint for PhDs, of course, but really I was trying to tease out how settled on this you really are. Look, it sounds like you have the drive to get it done if only you can settle on some sort of proposal. And the proposal will change beyond all recognition anyway, so it only really has to be 'sort-of' settled when you get the thing sent in. There's no reason you couldn't do both: 'sooner' depends on a lot of factors, not least finishing the PhD on time and getting it examined in a timely manner. You'd then very likely need to rewrite portions and edit it for specific style specifications for publishers etc. It's all possible, but realistically you are looking at five years. Could you get other stuff done in five years?

In any case, I don't want to throw you off one way or the other. It does seem to me like you'd complete the PhD and like you actually do have the basis for it already - you really need to get this research question sorted!

I usually think of Curry as a fairly obscure scholar, so that's interesting to hear. I wrote an article for his journal The Ecological Citizen well before I went on to do the Masters.

Now, I will say that the absolute last option I had in mind was to study another Masters in a different subject. I'd hope that Masters are fairly interchangeable. I guess it depends on the university and the type of PhD pursued. My friend recently started a PhD in the area of literature and psychology/medicine, but literature has been his sole subject since undergrad. I could be turned down for a PhD proposal that focuses solely on philosophy, but I'd like to think that this wouldn't be the case for something that specifically looks at the intersection between ethics and narrative, say. Unfortunately, my Masters thesis, while fairly broad in terms of philosophical underpinnings, was still focused on exploring the work of two early fantasists. I'm not interested in continuing to work on Lord Dunsany, my primary author, at PhD level. The MA thesis really was a steppingstone to getting into the humanities a little more and to explore the notion of Earth-centred sacrality without needing to engage as rigorously in the philosophical side.

To answer your main question, I think a lot of this comes down to the credibility element for me. If I didn't think that, I'd leave the PhD path without much pain. People say that a PhD isn't everything and you don't need one to write books, but I have this strange feeling that I'd need to do a doctorate in order for my hypothetical non-fiction book to hold any weight. I can easily envisage having written my first non-fiction book and it being rejected as a result of a lack of credentials. I'd then regret not doing the PhD. I do have a habit of catastrophizing and throwing obstacles in my way when I haven't experienced problems any yet though.

I finished the Masters in September and since then I've been mulling over my options and considering writing a few articles and essays. About two weeks ago I conversed with various faculties at a few universities about my ideas just to gauge interest, then I got rather stressed when I started considering a proposal for January, as well as OOC funding. It was all too short notice and a bit chaotic, so I decided to leave it. I suppose all I can do is try and narrow down my area of interest while looking for NGO jobs. Obviously the NGO situation is a little tricky in that I'd then need to decide if I leave a job post to study early 2025, provided I manage to land on a secure proposal and it gets accepted. I'm really just waiting for something to click. If something does click, I might be able to say with more certainty that I want to do a PhD.

Thanks again for the engagement. You don't need to keep posting, but I'd appreciate any further thoughts if you have them. I may update this thread periodically if it stays open.

gjd800 has already given you a good run down, so not a huge amount to add. Like he said, a doctorate does not open many doors or lead to the sort of life affirming impacts you may be expecting. As is normal I got a double published outcome in some good quality journals, and my phone is ringing off the hook (not). It was a very hard slog to get through for very little outcome. The only thing that got me through is the love of the project, as i and my colleagues knew that there is no tangible or immediate benefit when you crawl across the finishing line and out of your viva.

I still do think you should do some large scale research but not the kind in a university. It sounds like you have some very rigid assumptions about publishing and why you might be rejected. These may be absolute hogwash, so if i were you id email all the main publishers and pose these questions. The idea of doing a PhD for credibility is silly, the only people i have found who pay it any notice are family or people who have no clue, people in my field or professionals dont even notice or care about it.

To pick up on your other point about throwing obstacles in your way. Sometimes we all put obstacles in our way due to loads of reasons, one being fear or worries about invalidation or rejection. It can be easier to delay or refuse to do what we want by kicking it down the road. This way we dont have to face putting our heart and soul into something and for another to simple dismiss it. This also allows us to hold onto a dream and in a way be happy, like "i could have been an amazing....if i had tried" etc. In the end though we might live in a constant state of impending doom, with the expected rejection always around the next corner, and us being increasingly driven to do more things to try and reduce the expected rejection from others (somepeople its academia, others financial etc). I am not sure if this is what is happening for you but if it is then i would say the best tonic for rejection is to face it and learn through it, dont keep chasing obstacles, cross them. There will be plenty of rejection in writing, all the best writers had it.

Take care,

Greg