A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos • Hacker News Board

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#161

Post by btrettel » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:05 PM UTC

shoo wrote: post #145

btrettel wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that academia selects for conformists, which is bad for curiousity driven research. Jeff Schmidt's book "Disciplined Minds" makes a similar argument. I have not read it all, though, so perhaps I should pick it up again. The book has a good description of the problem, but in my view the author views the process as more political than it necessarily is. I also think the book's solutions are unlikely to help. Bu…

Disciplined Minds is a great read. Early on the book discusses some data that indicates more highly educated people tend to be more supportive politically of the government than the population in general. (E.g. during the Vietnam war lawyers defending anti-war activists in the US were trying to figure out how to pack juries with people who would be favorable to their clients and discovered that roughly the more educa…

> One rough argument made in the book is for workers performing roles with work that can be completely specified by superiors, it's less necessary for workers to demonstrate they can conform to how their employer wants them to think, provided they do the work. For professional roles involving more intellectual work where an employee's day to day tasks cannot be completely specified in advance, it's important for such employees to demonstrate they can think how the organisation wishes them to think, so an important part of training for these roles is essentially political training.

Great summary. I guess my qualm is that this is not necessarily political. I'll admit it often is, but in my field I think people are often dedicated to bad ideas because of what I see as institutional inertia, the sunk cost fallacy, or not liking math, not just politics.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#162

Post by tsumnia » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:06 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #105

stealthmodeclan wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For same reason for which we memorize alphabets.

Do people do PhDs in things similar to reciting the alphabet? What do you think the examination for a PhD involves? It's a thesis and oral example. You can't produce a thesis by memorising someone else's work.

My current research is on retyping coding examples because I believe we don't give enough repetition (or rote memorization) in CS and that initial frustration is a primary reason for the high attrition/failure rates.

To shift the view, I don't need to be a kinesiologist or nutritionist to work out. By all means, they help, but are not necessary. The "memorization" of repeatedly going to the gym creates the motivation to get better, which motivates learning how nutrition and kinesiology impact performance. The point is there is some degree of "regurgitation of facts" that is necessary for progress.

"To memorize" vs. "To understand" is the core difference in Eastern vs. Western education styles. You need both obviously, but when and where to "memorize" and when and where to "understand" are often debated. My research idea is that more foundation of facts is needed because then you can talk about theory without worrying someone doesn't understand.

(To invoke Bloom Taxonomy) So while I'm not "just memorizing" all these different meta-cognitive theories of how people learn, I need to know them well enough that I can apply them. Once I can apply them, I can evaluate them, and eventually see enough patterns that I can create my own models and theories.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#163

Post by doctorsher » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:11 PM UTC

bradhoffman wrote: post #135

doctorsher wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What type of masters degree is it? Course-based or thesis-based? If you are interested in continuing on to a PhD, a thesis-based masters would give you a much better insight. Even better if you try to publish while you are getting your degree. If it is a course-based masters, it will take you a lot of extra work outside of classes to get a taste of research. Do you already know your area of interest? This would be tr…

I choose to take the thesis route, but I still have 27 hours of coursework to complete as well. My goal was to have 2-3 publications over the next year, but I am not sure how feasible it is. I am in the middle of determining a route for my research right now. Leaning towards AI, but also enjoy Operating Systems, Networking, and Security.

Wow, 27 hours of coursework and a thesis! Are you sure you can complete this in one year? That seems like a very heavy schedule. I guess it depends how your department accounts for course credit hours. My department was 30 hours of coursework for the course-based masters, 18 for the thesis-based masters -- 3 credit hours per course.

It sounds like a very important role of your coursework will be to get a more refined idea of what research you'd like to perform. I'd recommend taking classes in each of your areas of interest. The more advanced classes might give you a better idea of research in that area. These are probably the classes the PhD students will be taking.

I think a goal of 2-3 publications in one year is pretty lofty, but it depends how motivated you are and how much work you have to put into each of those publications. I think one solid publication (long paper, good conference/journal) will already give you a substantial edge in PhD admissions. This is a good goal; if you can do more, all the better! But I would hate for you to feel like you didn't meet your goal, and not be satisfied with one publication. Honestly, even if you go through the trouble of submitting a paper and it gets rejected, that is still an incredibly valuable learning experience.

Feel free to email / google hangouts me at adam.r.drescher (at) gmail (dot) com if you have more detailed questions, want my perspective during your graduate school experience, etc. I'm happy to help.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#164

Post by stealthmodeclan » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:13 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #105

stealthmodeclan wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For same reason for which we memorize alphabets.

Do people do PhDs in things similar to reciting the alphabet? What do you think the examination for a PhD involves? It's a thesis and oral example. You can't produce a thesis by memorising someone else's work.

> You can't produce a thesis by memorising someone else's work

I did not imply this. If you looked up every basic result, you'll be demotivated easily.

It does require some memorization.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#165

Post by j7ake » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:29 PM UTC

"They would finish their PhD when they have made a difference in the real world."

By that metric, most fundamental discoveries in the last 200 years would not have been enough to finish a PhD.

Even Hamming's error correcting codes took 10+ years for Bell Labs to implement it. And even then it was because they had no other alternatives and were in a bind.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#166

Post by baby » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:30 PM UTC

fhood wrote: post #58

Man, this view of getting a PhD, which seems fairly common, is so alien to me. Both my parents are research professors, both regularly have students, and I have never seen any of the misery or stress that people keep bringing up. Sure, if you are unprepared to do research then you shouldn't do a PhD, but my parents' students are hand picked, and it is very rare that they end up with a student that doesn't want to, or…

I guess it depends on your field, but I've definitely seen that happening in Physics and Math. I have many friends who continued school to pursue a PhD while I left to work in the industry. It's a mix of:

* dropped out (some changed field completely)

* failed to pass their defense

* were miserable until they obtained their PhD

* managed to obtain their PhD after a looooong time and a lot of financial trouble. After that followed a long quest to look for a job (humanities).

* was uber successful and loved it

Note that these are people I know from all over the world, not just one country or one school.

The one guy that was uber successful absolutely loved what he was doing. The others either did not have the passion, or found out later that they did not enjoy doing research that much, or worse loved it but could not afford being poor.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#167

Post by mikeklaas » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:42 PM UTC

bradhoffman wrote: post #84

You all are kind of scaring me a bit... I just finished my Bachelor's and am starting my Master's this month. I have no formal research experience, but I planned to dive in during my Master's. For anyone who has done/is doing there PhD, if there is any advice you all could give me in order to get the most out of this next year before I apply for PhD programs, that would be great.

I think doing a master's is a great way to find out if you are cut out for/want to do research. I did a master's, was very happy I did, and very happily didn't pursue a PhD afterward.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#168

Post by nakashimakid » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

TearsInTheRain wrote: post #104

moh_maya wrote: post #67

What are the politicians there for then? I'm not being facetious here. Politics is one of the primary avenues of bringing about social change. Ditto civil service. A PhD should be about novel contributions that increase the sum total of human knowledge.

Ok but we shouldnt pursue knowledge haphazardly for knowledge sake. There are an infinite number of interesting avenues of inquiry we could send our academics down that would be completely useless. The paths we choose should be guided by the needs of practical application. How else can we value information if not practical application?

"Practical application" is the domain of the engineer, the business person, the sales department, etc. Science and pure curiosity are one and the same.

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#169

Post by WalterSear » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:47 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #155

WalterSear wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I'm one of the freaks in question. I'm not one to sit around pipe dreaming, but I've found a vastly better fit writing code at startups than I ever did in grad school. I get to invent, experiment, learn, and at a vastly faster pace. I'm even working in the same field, solving similar problems to the ones I worked on in school.

This is great if the problems you want to solve have direct business applications with a turnaround time of tomorrow. There aren't very many startups funding basic research, though.

I know. That's why I went back to grad school in the first place. Big mistake :)

Re: A PhD should be about improving society, not chasing academic kudos

#170

Post by nakashimakid » Thu, Aug 09, 2018, 7:52 PM UTC

fixermark wrote: post #143

Basically every human endeavor "should" be about putting the general good over the individual good. After all, it's in one's own selfish interests for that to be the state of affairs; there are far more people not-you doing things than people who are you doing things, so you stand to benefit more if all those not-you people are doing work that indirectly improves your quality-of-life. ;) The (sometimes literally) mil…

I posit that "one's own selfish interests", which can include pursuing a research topic for the "general good", is a major driver of scientific inquiry.

The evaluation of whether "general good" is advanced when answering a scientific question is subjective. Might I remind you that our foundations of probability - a pillar of mathematics and more - was furthered with the intention of winning gambling games? Or that our understanding of the limits of human physiology - how much force a skull can withstand, time before death under hypothermia - was furthered by Nazi scientists at the expense of Jews and other minorities?

While born out of sin, these two examples of science unequivocally better the "general good" - now...