Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
magazine.jhsph.edu
Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
1–10 of 79 posts
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#2Sure, let's "put back" something that was never there in the first place. Philosophiae Doctor is just the name of the degree. Where did it come from? Let's ask wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy ):
> In most of Europe, all fields other than theology, law, and medicine were traditionally known as philosophy, and in Germany and elsewhere in Europe the basic faculty of (liberal) arts was known as the faculty of philosophy.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#3Sure, let's "put back" something that was never there in the first place. Philosophiae Doctor is just the name of the degree. Where did it come from? Let's ask wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy ): > In most of Europe, all fields other than theology, law, and medicine were traditionally known as philosophy, and in Germany and elsewhere in Europe the basic faculty of (liberal) arts was know…
It's also interesting to note that Germany (and elsewhere in Europe) also have the degrees of Doctor of Engineering or Doctor of Technology. If one believes that PhD's should be more philosophical/theoretical (and I'm certainly cool with that), you should also add a new, comparable, degree for people who really want to spend few years digging into the hardcore technical side of their chosen field.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#4I had a friend/college from Russia, he told this is the case there. During the thesis defense there is a section reserved for Philosophy (of life, meaning etc). Any Russians care to elaborate?
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#5I had a friend/college from Russia, he told this is the case there. During the thesis defense there is a section reserved for Philosophy (of life, meaning etc). Any Russians care to elaborate?
Can't elaborate on the thesis, but prior to enrolling for a PhD program you indeed have to pass a philosophy exam. This is usually considered the most difficult. Passed it in summer.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#6Sure, let's "put back" something that was never there in the first place. Philosophiae Doctor is just the name of the degree. Where did it come from? Let's ask wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy ): > In most of Europe, all fields other than theology, law, and medicine were traditionally known as philosophy, and in Germany and elsewhere in Europe the basic faculty of (liberal) arts was know…
Philosophy is also responsible for the scientific method and things like the null hypothesis. There's a strong tendency for 'hard science' folks to look down their noses at philosophy, but the truth is that the fundamentals of their research is squarely due to the philosophy. Philosophy is responsible for scientists developing the methods of rigorous observation.
Source: I once looked down my nose at philosophy, then I started doing first-priciples on the methodology I was taught. Turns out that 'philosophy of science' is a field unto itself.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#7> We need big thinkers
We need some, but there aren't anywhere near enough big-thinking jobs for all these PhDs.
> The success of science and technology will always lead to new ethical dilemmas. How do you spot them and try to work with society before they become problems? A better appreciation of ethics is likely to address what has become an epidemic of retractions in the scientific literature.
All the recent retractions have nothing to do with scientists being unaware of ethical dilemmas raised by their work. They're to do with perverse incentives, p-hacking, and occasionally deliberate dishonesty.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#8> We need big thinkers We need some, but there aren't anywhere near enough big-thinking jobs for all these PhDs. > The success of science and technology will always lead to new ethical dilemmas. How do you spot them and try to work with society before they become problems? A better appreciation of ethics is likely to address what has become an epidemic of retractions in the scientific literature. All the recent retra…
Yeah, pretty much exactly this. In the abstract, I fully support teaching science PhDs more about Quine, Russell, Popper, Carnap - they are all great thinkers who had very intelligent ideas. In practice, PhDs at top tier institutions are far too concerned with the day to day rat race that the history of ideas is not likely to be a serious priority.
As long as the competition for stable positions will remain so fierce, and the criteria for which candidates are judged will remain so narrow, the problems are likely to be far more prosaic than those raised by analytical philosophers.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#9I had a friend/college from Russia, he told this is the case there. During the thesis defense there is a section reserved for Philosophy (of life, meaning etc). Any Russians care to elaborate?
At my university (TU Delft), we have to include a set of premises/statements that are open for questioning during the thesis defense. You're supposed to list ten statements and the usual breakdown is that a few will be on the specific topic that you're graduating on, a few will be about the field of research at a whole and the rest are "philosophical musings". I've started thinking about mine and I actually think it's a valuable exercise to have this as part of the culmination of a long and arduous journey. I think it's in our graduation process now as a matter of tradition, rather than an impetus to spawn true philosophical debate, which is a shame. Friends who have graduated have put down some pretty deep thoughts, which I think reflects upon the fact that a PhD done right provokes you to think about the nature of research and the world around you.
Re: Put the “Ph” Back in PhD
#10> We need big thinkers We need some, but there aren't anywhere near enough big-thinking jobs for all these PhDs. > The success of science and technology will always lead to new ethical dilemmas. How do you spot them and try to work with society before they become problems? A better appreciation of ethics is likely to address what has become an epidemic of retractions in the scientific literature. All the recent retra…
I quite agree that the post PhD job market is kind of challenging as there are few companies tackling big questions.
However, if you forget the job market, the argument the guy is making is absolutely spot on. There's a solid trend in academia that is "publish early, publish fast". Although one might argue that it actually makes sense (career-wise or whatever), it is intrinsic in such a system to penalise pursuing big, risky ideas. Considering that the PhD (and the few years after) are the most productive in a researcher's life, it is a shame that students are not actively encouraged to think bigger.