|
I'm a bit surprised at some of the responses in this thread. I work all day and weekends because I want to do it. If I didn't, I wouldn't be slaving away at a PhD making less than enough to live with no light at the end of the tunnel.
Industry work is not interesting. I do grad work (and will continue in academia) because I like it. I do the research I want to on the projects I am interested in.
That kind of freedom comes at a very, very steep price. If you don't want to pay it, you do not have the right to complain.
|
Not all post docs work as hard as that guy in Cal Tech.
I volunteer in a organic lab, the post doc works from 10AM-7pm most days, sometimes he leaves at 9pm but that happens rarely.
Grad students don't have it as hard as post docs, it all depends on your PI. The PI in the letter sounds like a real asshole.
|
Also in light of this saying that universities train twice as many PhDs as there are jobs for them... whatever.. I believe that just like music artists, you need a marketable feature / talent / ambition to be taken seriously by the real people that make the world go round (investors/companies) to actually do any 'damage'.
Until you actually garner enough support/resources/money then you can actually proceed in specific 'world changing' endeavors. (Or if you can find a company that already does that and get hired that is)
That's what is really DIM imo if you want to change the world.
|
On July 26 2010 23:01 miseiler wrote: I'm a bit surprised at some of the responses in this thread. I work all day and weekends because I want to do it. If I didn't, I wouldn't be slaving away at a PhD making less than enough to live with no light at the end of the tunnel.
Industry work is not interesting. I do grad work (and will continue in academia) because I like it. I do the research I want to on the projects I am interested in.
That kind of freedom comes at a very, very steep price. If you don't want to pay it, you do not have the right to complain.
|
I think that anyone who does a engineering or science phd is smart enough to know that a phd is not the way to quick money and easy work. We do it because we like doing the work. If you don't like it enough to work long hours discovering new things, you probably shouldn't be doing a phd.
However, there is a difference between wanting to work those extra hours and being forced to work those extra hours. Personally, I set targets for my research. If I meet them ahead of schedaule, I can slow down abit. If I am late on them, I will work more.
So it's true that the OP needs to be taken in context. If the postdoc is getting great results but only working "regular" hours most of the time then the prof has a serious problem. If the postdoc should really be putting more time into his research but has just been ditching... he might want to reconsider his career choice.
|
"Something is rotten in the state of Chemistry."
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
|
I respect anyone who is passionate about science to go get a PhD. Im an undergrad working in a lab and I would rather kill myself then do grad school.
|
I believe the main problem with academia these days is the growing use of adjunct professors. Rather than higher professors on a ten-year track many colleges and universities are offering up a bunch of adjunct positions. Thus the goal of becoming a professor with ten year is that much more challenging. This problem is not unique to the sciences but seems to be pretty common regardless of major.
|
8748 Posts
On July 26 2010 23:01 miseiler wrote: I'm a bit surprised at some of the responses in this thread. I work all day and weekends because I want to do it. If I didn't, I wouldn't be slaving away at a PhD making less than enough to live with no light at the end of the tunnel.
Industry work is not interesting. I do grad work (and will continue in academia) because I like it. I do the research I want to on the projects I am interested in.
That kind of freedom comes at a very, very steep price. If you don't want to pay it, you do not have the right to complain.
Attitudes like yours are the reason why the system continues to survive. You provided an explanation for the way it is, but not an argument supporting the way it is. There's no justification for the system being the way it is. Those working conditions just suck. And science is probably worse off because of it since talented people have incentive to take other paths.
So yeah, it's understandable that people do it. But people who don't want to do it, or did it and quit, haven't lost their right to judge it.
Ideally, all jobs would have perfect working conditions. I can't think of a reason why someone would disagree with that. So, all PhD students should have perfect working conditions. Any outsider can see that the working conditions aren't perfect. So they complain that the working conditions aren't perfect. It does not matter that some PhD students have perfect working conditions, or that some PhD students have tolerable working conditions, or even that all PhD students think that the working conditions are worth it and are satisfied. The fact is still that the working conditions are less than perfect so they should be improved to the greatest extent possible.
|
tbh the only reason that student/postdoc research is so damn time-consuming is because of how competitive the sciences are in the United States. The people you work for while doing graduate research are for the most part hypercompetitive, backstabbing, Machiavellian, draconic assholes who want nothing more than to have that next breakthrough research, even if that means undercutting someone else to get it. They are motivated to get the research done as fast and efficiently as possible, even if you aren't.
That being said, I plan to pursue medical training after undergraduate, research is just too sixth-grade drama with multimillion dollar equipment for me.
|
On August 09 2010 11:56 gdroxor wrote: tbh the only reason that student/postdoc research is so damn time-consuming is because of how competitive the sciences are in the United States. The people you work for while doing graduate research are for the most part hypercompetitive, backstabbing, Machiavellian, draconic assholes who want nothing more than to have that next breakthrough research, even if that means undercutting someone else to get it. They are motivated to get the research done as fast and efficiently as possible, even if you aren't.
That being said, I plan to pursue medical training after undergraduate, research is just too sixth-grade drama with multimillion dollar equipment for me.
This is the position I'm in right now. There are far too many people who are willing to backstab someone if it means they further their own career, even if it is by the smallest bit. I may end up doing medicine after undergrad instead of going towards research.
|
On August 09 2010 11:56 gdroxor wrote: tbh the only reason that student/postdoc research is so damn time-consuming is because of how competitive the sciences are in the United States. The people you work for while doing graduate research are for the most part hypercompetitive, backstabbing, Machiavellian, draconic assholes who want nothing more than to have that next breakthrough research, even if that means undercutting someone else to get it. They are motivated to get the research done as fast and efficiently as possible, even if you aren't.
That being said, I plan to pursue medical training after undergraduate, research is just too sixth-grade drama with multimillion dollar equipment for me. really don't understand this attitude. i thought it was a generally understood fact that medical training is much more intense and competitive than graduate school (for those who enjoy doing science).
and though i've only worked at 2 labs the people i've worked with were just stellar human beings who really cared about how everyone was doing personally and did their work in their very specific niche of basic science without complaining or attacking others
|
I know If I was going to cal-tech I would be working my ass off and doing whatever I can to get ahead and get to know the professor.
If you are going to cal-tech, you obviously have a brain in your head, use it! SO obvious.
|
On August 09 2010 07:29 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 23:01 miseiler wrote: I'm a bit surprised at some of the responses in this thread. I work all day and weekends because I want to do it. If I didn't, I wouldn't be slaving away at a PhD making less than enough to live with no light at the end of the tunnel.
Industry work is not interesting. I do grad work (and will continue in academia) because I like it. I do the research I want to on the projects I am interested in.
That kind of freedom comes at a very, very steep price. If you don't want to pay it, you do not have the right to complain. Attitudes like yours are the reason why the system continues to survive. You provided an explanation for the way it is, but not an argument supporting the way it is. There's no justification for the system being the way it is. Those working conditions just suck. And science is probably worse off because of it since talented people have incentive to take other paths. So yeah, it's understandable that people do it. But people who don't want to do it, or did it and quit, haven't lost their right to judge it. Ideally, all jobs would have perfect working conditions. I can't think of a reason why someone would disagree with that. So, all PhD students should have perfect working conditions. Any outsider can see that the working conditions aren't perfect. So they complain that the working conditions aren't perfect. It does not matter that some PhD students have perfect working conditions, or that some PhD students have tolerable working conditions, or even that all PhD students think that the working conditions are worth it and are satisfied. The fact is still that the working conditions are less than perfect so they should be improved to the greatest extent possible.
No, the reason the system continues to survive is because there is limited money for these positions and therefore competition is extremly heavy. I don't know what a perfect working condition is to you but it varies from job to job.
|
On August 10 2010 22:45 sikyon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2010 07:29 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On July 26 2010 23:01 miseiler wrote: I'm a bit surprised at some of the responses in this thread. I work all day and weekends because I want to do it. If I didn't, I wouldn't be slaving away at a PhD making less than enough to live with no light at the end of the tunnel.
Industry work is not interesting. I do grad work (and will continue in academia) because I like it. I do the research I want to on the projects I am interested in.
That kind of freedom comes at a very, very steep price. If you don't want to pay it, you do not have the right to complain. Attitudes like yours are the reason why the system continues to survive. You provided an explanation for the way it is, but not an argument supporting the way it is. There's no justification for the system being the way it is. Those working conditions just suck. And science is probably worse off because of it since talented people have incentive to take other paths. So yeah, it's understandable that people do it. But people who don't want to do it, or did it and quit, haven't lost their right to judge it. Ideally, all jobs would have perfect working conditions. I can't think of a reason why someone would disagree with that. So, all PhD students should have perfect working conditions. Any outsider can see that the working conditions aren't perfect. So they complain that the working conditions aren't perfect. It does not matter that some PhD students have perfect working conditions, or that some PhD students have tolerable working conditions, or even that all PhD students think that the working conditions are worth it and are satisfied. The fact is still that the working conditions are less than perfect so they should be improved to the greatest extent possible. No, the reason the system continues to survive is because there is limited money for these positions and therefore competition is extremly heavy. I don't know what a perfect working condition is to you but it varies from job to job.
Wait, he implied that a working perfect condition is the same for all jobs?
|
Just to clear up a general misunderstanding - medicine IS science... Stop talking about it like was some sort of bogus or lesser science. And if you want to do make a career in the university world, it requires the same or even more backstabbing as other scientific fields; so turning towards medicine for an easier time is going to leave you disappointed.
EDIT: just realised that I might've misunderstood what someone was saying about "go doing medicine" as he/she/it probably meant partake in the manufactoring in a private corp. - if that was the case, my apologies for the above and you are right; it is less competetive. Just gotten pretty tired of people talking about medicine as a lesser science than chemistry, math or physics.
|
no, people talking about going into medicine after undergrad are not referring to working in the pharma or biotech. they mean they want to get an MD. but as someone already pointed out, medical school and the immediate years that follow are even more cutthroat than graduate school :shrug:
|
|
|
|