Why is it framed that there are too many PhDs, and not that there isn't enough funding for research, art, etc.?https://twitter.com/bopinion/status/1346104350993768448 …
-
I think the PhD is an obsolete mechanism. "Important" is doing a lot of work there. Even in STEM where the case is easier to make objectively ("cure cancer! solve climate!") it is dangerous to let self-absorbed people decide what is "important" on the public dime.
I think 90% of academia in general should be re-amateurized as a side hustle for people who have a living from other sources. I suspect a talented anthropologist would do better work if they could earn a good wage flipping burgers half-time than as full time researcher.
-
-
People don't get the extreme moral hazard of funding for PhDs from basically unaccountable sources captured by cartels of their own advisors. It's a self-perpetuating system of self-congratulatory production.
-
You're completely failing to value the deep expertise that we get from people focusing on a particular area of study for decades.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm in between: highly skeptical of academic institutions, but think there's likely something between there and fully amateurization. It's probably that there need to be way more / smaller funders who are accountable for results, or perhaps have finite/renewable charters.
-
Also think we should start to recognize/endow alternative credentials. I can think of a bunch of history podcasters/YouTubers to whom I'd entrust my children's education than many Ph.D.s
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.