- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,931
- Reaction score
- 1,454
I really don't believe that having a PhD is an indicator of gravitas in any subject. They are relatively easy to gain, don't actually have to be too factual because the student has to write a thesis ( otherwise their own theory) of their subject, they don't have to be agreed with they just have to be a reasonable argument. "To achieve the PhD degree it is necessary to demonstrate that you have mastered the skills necessary to carry out research to professional standards. The point of the PhD is not to demonstrate your brilliance (although this might also occur), but to demonstrate that you have mastered a set of research skills." This is the point of a PhD, it doesn't mean what you have to say in a subject like economics or politial science is necessarily the correct and only theory, only that you can theorise and articulate it.
I got a PhD. in physics. From a left-coast, ivy-league equivalent university. With honors.
I'm a less than mediocre physicist.
I'm a damn fine engineer. (Peerless, if you ask me. Don't ask me. :lfao: )
I got my PhD. because I had to give direction and supervision to people with PhD.s and they resented it(my not having one.). Boss called me into the office ,and said, pretty much: you're going to get a PhD. Here's where you'll go.This is what your thesis is.Here's your research project. You're advisors will be these guys. Your thesis will be classified upon completion. You have three years, but we'd like to see it done in two. We'll pay for travel to California when you need to go-probably every two weeks or so-and we'll pay you straight time for lab time for your research project.
I got a PhD. In a hard science. Big deal.