NationStates Jolt Archive

Seeing as it is now April, and after a grueling season of giving ETS my money and writing essays about myseslf, I stand ready to commit to one of the doctoral programs that have offered me admission*. It is therefore time to re-examine higher education.

I thought I might offer the diverse opinionated folks of NSG a chance to convince me that I am a complete fool for going down Academia Avenue, that whatever doctorate I receive is ultimately worthless, meaningless, or a counterproductive waste of time, or otherwise offer critique of the nature of, existence of, utility of, value attached to, and the social, economic, and cultural problems created by doctoral degrees**.

After all, with my mathematics master's, I could become a productive member of society, teach mathematics in the US or abroad, or even become an investment banker***. Alternatively, I could burn all my material possessions, shave my head, and wander the earth counting things and claiming to have proved various obscure mathematical theorems in order to con people out of food.

*Ohio State University, Physics program; University of Georgia, Physics program; University of California at Irvine, Mathematical Behavioral Sciences program; Florida State University, Pure Mathematics program; University of Tennessee, Mathematics program.
**The only decent excuse for spending more than a decade as a student, true, but let's look beyond that, shall we?
***Some restrictions may apply. Investment bankers may or may not count as productive members of society in some value systems.

I'm on my fifth year in grad school. My committee has taken to calling me "a lifer."

My advice:

Go to grad school if you are prepared for the possibility of spending a decade working on a thesis. You probably won't take that long, but you shouldn't start unless you're prepared to cope with the possibility.

Depends on what you want. If you want to stay in research, whether academia or industrial, it's pretty much a need. If you don't, it's fairly pointless. On the other hand, the job market at the moment is crap, so right now would be the ideal moment to postpone job hunting for a couple of years...

Congrats on getting accepted.

I would do a cost benefit analysis to see whether it is worth it. I can't do one for you of course since I don't know how much you value getting knowledge, how much you could expect to make as opposed to now with the masters, etc.

Mulling over the same possibility at the moment. Not particularly interested in a PhD myself but others I know are applying as they really want to go down the academia route.

Plus given the current economic/employment market, things might have picked up a bit by the time you've finished - I would never say higher education is worthless. Ever.

It just depends where your passion lies. If you're really not passionate about your field, don't start the PhD in the first place.

/imo

There is always some use for a PhD, some women love a Pretty huge Dick, so you can put that iunto use.

Going into my final few months of write up I bloody hope that PhDs aren't useless. Really you have to ask yourself - do I want to go into research? It doesn't have to be academia per se - there are a lot of research jobs out in the RealWorldTM (I managed to bag one myself :D).

Something that is worth considering is if you can get funding. Getting funding will make your life a lot easier.


Go to grad school if you are prepared for the possibility of spending a decade working on a thesis. You probably won't take that long, but you shouldn't start unless you're prepared to cope with the possibility.

Seriously? Unless you're doing it part-time, departments in the UK really really like you to finish in four years - three or 3.5 years is standard especially for sciences (and funding is matched to this). But then our PhDs are research only and more and more they're trying to encourage doing a master's first (certainly you'd have more chance getting on a course).

Go ahead. If you want to go down the Quant route in I-Banking, you'll need a PhD anyways (they usually don't take anything less beyond a certain level) and the job market right now is so shitty, your opportunity cost has reduced drastically.

But maybe I'm biased right now, because I'm having the best educational experience of my life in my first look at postgrad (PhD-level Econ stuff, or so we're told). And I'm even considering doing a grad diploma in maths if for some reason I don't get a job at the end of this year, if not a PhD in Econ.

When hiring, I'm usually able to bump up a candidate with a PhD instead of an MS by one salary level, which equals anywhere from a $10,000-$35,000 increase in yearly salary.

Seriously? Unless you're doing it part-time, departments in the UK really really like you to finish in four years - three or 3.5 years is standard especially for sciences (and funding is matched to this). But then our PhDs are research only and more and more they're trying to encourage doing a master's first (certainly you'd have more chance getting on a course).
My program says they'll kick you out after 7 years, but this rule is generally not enforced.

My parents were both in grad school from 1974 to 1984.

Depends on what you want. If you want to stay in research, whether academia or industrial, it's pretty much a need. If you don't, it's fairly pointless. On the other hand, the job market at the moment is crap, so right now would be the ideal moment to postpone job hunting for a couple of years...

I'd agree with this for the most part, but I'd like to just add another point of view that might be useful here.

For now you're right; there are a lot of things you can do without that PhD and still be a useful member of society -- or a wandering mendicant. But I'm an old guy and I've seen a trend that might illuminate your decision. When I was in university (that's the '70s) there were jobs that could be done with just a BA or BSc that by the late '80s needed at least a master's. Some of those same jobs now prefer a doctorate of some kind. And jobs that required a master's back in the '70s tend to look for doctorates, and have done for awhile now.

Example: you mention teaching maths. In the '60s when I was in high school (I was college prep/sciences), only two of my maths teachers had a master's degree. Only three of my science teachers had one. Try that now! Last time I visited my high school, all the teachers there now are MAs or MScs, and I've heard a few of them are doctors. Even most of the art teachers and gym teachers have master's degrees. I also got to talk to one of the teachers I had back then. He'd retired some years before I saw him. He told me he'd carried on for his PhD about 10 years after I left just because he could see that he was going to need it. He called it something like "using up his reservoir". He meant that he could see that pretty soon he wouldn't know enough beyond what he was teaching to feel comfortable. He taught the advanced classes in biology so he had to be sharp. But he said that by the time he retired, he could see that his classes would've outgrown him if he hadn't done the doctorate.

So, you don't need a PhD now, it's true. But what will the job market be like in 10 or 20 years? And will it be harder for you to go back for a PhD later than it is to carry on for one now? That question requires a crystal ball, I know, but the trend right now seems to be on the side of having more qualifications, not fewer.

One other thing. I don't know how certain you are just now about wanting to do certain jobs or not wanting to do certain others. But you might change your mind a few years down the road. And it might be that a PhD is the difference between being able to take up a new opportunity or start on a different career, and just having to stay where you are at the time.

The degree is just a key. You don't have to go through the doors it opens, but it's nice to have it in your pocket, just in case.

I don't know if that helps, but it might.

Going into my final few months of write up I bloody hope that PhDs aren't useless. Really you have to ask yourself - do I want to go into research? It doesn't have to be academia per se - there are a lot of research jobs out in the RealWorldTM (I managed to bag one myself :D).

Something that is worth considering is if you can get funding. Getting funding will make your life a lot easier.
I have funding offers at four of those schools; I probably wouldn't even consider it without funding. (Which is one of a couple reasons why I won't be going to UT; one of my fellow master's students here at Appalachian followed up on his application there to see where their funding was; apparently the banking crisis ate it.)

Really, academia is my idea of a good time. Despite the crack about investment banking, I'm really not that interested in the traditional corporate world.
Seriously? Unless you're doing it part-time, departments in the UK really really like you to finish in four years - three or 3.5 years is standard especially for sciences (and funding is matched to this). But then our PhDs are research only and more and more they're trying to encourage doing a master's first (certainly you'd have more chance getting on a course).
Ph. D. programs in the US are longer, especially in the sciences. Very few US physics doctoral programs average less than six years, and tenth-year students are not completely unheard-of.

I have funding offers at four of those schools; I probably wouldn't even consider it without funding. (Which is one of a couple reasons why I won't be going to UT; one of my fellow master's students here at Appalachian followed up on his application there to see where their funding was; apparently the banking crisis ate it.)

Really, academia is my idea of a good time. Despite the crack about investment banking, I'm really not that interested in the traditional corporate world.

Then I'd say go for it. It's a big investiment but if you have funding the question you have to be asking yourself is 'Will I enjoy doing the PhD'? If the answer is yes then go for it

Ph. D. programs in the US are longer, especially in the sciences. Very few US physics doctoral programs average less than six years, and tenth-year students are not completely unheard-of.

On an unrelated note why do people think that is? Now I know US PhD courses have quite a taught component that UK ones don't however that doesn't quite account for the massive discrepency. Nor can it be said that the thesis part is harder/requires more research because I've read several US thesis and, tbh, they're more the size of what would be an MPhill here (theoreticallly you'd expect this to be because of balancing out with the taught component). So why does the thesis part of a US PhD take as long if not longer than an entire UK PhD?

On an unrelated note why do people think that is? Now I know US PhD courses have quite a taught component that UK ones don't however that doesn't quite account for the massive discrepency. Nor can it be said that the thesis part is harder/requires more research because I've read several US thesis and, tbh, they're more the size of what would be an MPhill here (theoreticallly you'd expect this to be because of balancing our with the taught component). So why does the thesis part of a US PhD take as long if not longer than an entire UK PhD?
My father suspects it has to do with the students not being as comfortable with the writing process - so actually producing the final dissertation takes longer than it should.

I've also heard that in some cases, in some departments, graduate students are doing most of the actual research work that their advisors are getting credit for, so their advisors hang on to them a little longer than strictly necessary.

There's also the consideration that graduate students in the US are often on teaching assistantships, which eat up a fair bit of time. It varies a lot field to field and department to department, though.

As someone who comes from a family of academics, I would say that a PhD can't hurt, but you don't need one. I have no degress and I'm making the same money that my co-workers with master degrees are. But this is field specific. Your mileage may vary.

I just got tired of living my life inside of books and classrooms and libraries. Probably because I spent a lot of my childhood in that, while my classmates talked about how their parents took them to construction sites and darkrooms and artist studios and research centers, while I went and sat in an office at the university.

Ph. D. programs in the US are longer, especially in the sciences. Very few US physics doctoral programs average less than six years, and tenth-year students are not completely unheard-of.
But usually aren't PhD programs in the US direct entry from undergrad? So they're like a Masters and a PhD rolled into one.

Like here, a PhD is usually 4-5 years, but you do a MSc/MA before that (since few places have direct entry) which is 1-2 years, so overall it's about 6 years... except at my school where they stop paying you if you do the entire process in five or fewer years (not counting leaves of absence).

But yeah, I don't know about your field specifically, in many fields having a PhD is only really useful if you plan on going into academia, otherwise a MSc/MA is just as good.

Oh, also, I'm working on my PhD now. It's pretty sweet.

But usually aren't PhD programs in the US direct entry from undergrad? So they're like a Masters and a PhD rolled into one.

Like here, a PhD is usually 4-5 years, but you do a MSc/MA before that (since few places have direct entry) which is 1-2 years, so overall it's about 6 years... except at my school where they stop paying you if you do the entire process in five or fewer years (not counting leaves of absence).


You can get on a UK PhD program direct from undergrad (because our undergrad degrees are very specialised) but more and more they are pushing towards getting an MSc first (or getting funding for 1+3 - one year of Masters and 3 years of PhDs).

But irrespective, I suppose I'm mostly curious as to why the thesis part of US PhDs seems to take an increadibly long time comparatively. Although that most students are also on teaching assistantships and effectively doing it part time like TJHairball said may answer it.

Doctor Hairball. Nice.

i've heard this a bunch of times, working with owners of large retail outlets. "so, you've got a degree in business/astrophysics/etc? here's a mop. get to work"

its a pretty common joke amongst the people i work with/for, but is also quite true

i've heard this a bunch of times, working with owners of large retail outlets. "so, you've got a degree in business/astrophysics/etc? here's a mop. get to work"

its a pretty common joke amongst the people i work with/for, but is also quite true

No one said getting work in academia or research was easy- especially if you are geographically limited, but depending on what you in for, a PhD is usually going to be an advantage in the job market.

take a good hard look at your professors. do you really want to end up like that?

take a good hard look at your prospects of getting a job (enabled only by your proposed phd) in a geographic area that you might want to live in.

think of the added pressure to DO something with your proposed phd. do you really want to be chained down that way?

are you sure its not time to be free for a while?

No one said getting work in academia or research was easy- especially if you are geographically limited, but depending on what you in for, a PhD is usually going to be an advantage in the job market.

if you can get a job that recognises and makes use of the degree/PhD. otherwise its just a piece of paper

You can get on a UK PhD program direct from undergrad (because our undergrad degrees are very specialised) but more and more they are pushing towards getting an MSc first (or getting funding for 1+3 - one year of Masters and 3 years of PhDs).

But irrespective, I suppose I'm mostly curious as to why the thesis part of US PhDs seems to take an increadibly long time comparatively. Although that most students are also on teaching assistantships and effectively doing it part time like TJHairball said may answer it.

Man, that would be sweet... but I thought that the UK was a bit abnormal for that. When I was in my last year of undergrad, we had a meeting where we discussed grad school and some of the profs were making fun of a new prof for being ridiculously young having completed a PhD in the UK and spending half the time doing grad school basically.

Man, that would be sweet... but I thought that the UK was a bit abnormal for that. When I was in my last year of undergrad, we had a meeting where we discussed grad school and some of the profs were making fun of a new prof for being ridiculously young having completed a PhD in the UK and spending half the time doing grad school basically.

I believe what tends to make the UK a bit unique (and thus the PhDs shorter) is that it's entierly research - there is next to no taught component involved as you a assumed to have learnt the necessary background at undergraduate and masters (if specialised area). So it really is a research apprenticeship.

That and departements really push students to finish in 4 years at most because otherwise they get their funding penalised, so it's in the departments best interset to ensure full time PhD students really are full time and don't get loaded down with teaching or non-PhD relevant research.

take a good hard look at your professors. do you really want to end up like that?

take a good hard look at your prospects of getting a job (enabled only by your proposed phd) in a geographic area that you might want to live in.

think of the added pressure to DO something with your proposed phd. do you really want to be chained down that way?

are you sure its not time to be free for a while?

We don't need no edjucation.
We don't need no thort control.
No dark sarcasm
In the clarsroom

Hey, professor! Leave them grads alone!

But usually aren't PhD programs in the US direct entry from undergrad? So they're like a Masters and a PhD rolled into one.
Typically they are like a master's and PhD, but having had a master's somewhere else won't necessarily exempt you from the coursework. Some programs favor admitting folks with master's, some don't. I noticed that in philosophy, actually, there was at least one program I looked at that required a master's to enroll in the doctoral program (naturally referring you to their master's program if you were getting your bachelor's).
Like here, a PhD is usually 4-5 years, but you do a MSc/MA before that (since few places have direct entry) which is 1-2 years, so overall it's about 6 years... except at my school where they stop paying you if you do the entire process in five or fewer years (not counting leaves of absence).

But yeah, I don't know about your field specifically, in many fields having a PhD is only really useful if you plan on going into academia, otherwise a MSc/MA is just as good.

Oh, also, I'm working on my PhD now. It's pretty sweet.
Well, that would depend on which field I decided to focus on (see fine print in OP; I have funding offers from some very different programs) but I think for most of it, a doctorate would be considered useful, and since I plan on sticking with academia anyway, I haven't been looking too hard at the corporate sector's habits in physics and math. I hear a little bit now and then, though (and of course the government is another major employer of physicists).

A PHD in mathematics really adds up. :)

A PHD in mathematics really adds up. :)

*Baddum Tsh* :D

We don't need no edjucation.
We don't need no thort control.
No dark sarcasm
In the clarsroom

Hey, professor! Leave them grads alone!
dammed straight!

It is therefore time to re-examine higher education.
I thought I might offer the diverse opinionated folks of NSG a chance to convince me that I am a complete fool for going down Academia Avenue, that whatever doctorate I receive is ultimately worthless, meaningless, or a counterproductive waste of time, or otherwise offer critique of the nature of, [...]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States#Role_of_education

Master's degree: $67,123
Professional degree: $100,000
Doctorate degree: $78,324

If you have a professional degree, i.e. a skill that can be used for activities that produce money, you don't need no steenking doctorate, for you'll be paid based on your actual merits, not papers.

If you're going down the academic route, where your work isn't going to produce any money, it's kinda hard to judge you by anything except the degrees you've got.

*Baddum Tsh* :D

I'm the variable in this equation. :D

If you're going the academic route, where you don't produce any money, it's kinda hard to judge you by anything except the degrees you've got.

If only - academics are expected to produce a LOT of money for their department from grants. In many ways a PhD may allow you access to academia but they won't be judging you by your degrees, instead they look at grants won, papers published, books, grants won, awards and did I mention grant money?

*Baddum Tsh* :D

Ah! Music graduate!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States#Role_of_education

Master's degree: $67,123
Professional degree: $100,000
Doctorate degree: $78,324

If you have a professional degree, i.e. a skill that can be used for activities that produce money, you don't need no steenking doctorate, for you'll be paid based on your actual merits, not papers.

If you're going down the academic route, where your work isn't going to produce any money, it's kinda hard to judge you by anything except the degrees you've got.

Or more precisely, it is hard for anyone without a similar level of expertise in the field to judge you by anything except the degrees you got.

That is kind of sad and lonely, to be out on a branch of human knowledge beyond the ken of most of humanity. Where you can't even describe your work to them, they're all "so you write stuff almost no-one reads, and that's your job?"

Not half as sad as judging someone's work by their pay packet though.

If you really, really enjoy academic work, then a PhD is not at all useless. Most of the graduate students I know, not to even mention the ones working on a doctorate, pretty much get paid to study. It's their job. That would make me want to saw my own head off...but I totally support people doing what they love, and being able to make a living from it.

So if it's what you want, go for it!

I recommend that you go for it. Getting my PhD was the one thing I never truly pursued and now that it's too late in the game, I regret it.

I'm the variable in this equation. :D

YOU are the variable in EVERYONE's equation! LMAO!

YOU are the variable in EVERYONE's equation! LMAO!

I can't help it. I'm irrational.

If you really, really enjoy academic work, then a PhD is not at all useless. Most of the graduate students I know, not to even mention the ones working on a doctorate, pretty much get paid to study. It's their job. That would make me want to saw my own head off...but I totally support people doing what they love, and being able to make a living from it.

So if it's what you want, go for it!
"Graduate student for life" would be OK except for the fact that I would want to be able to save money eventually, perhaps even reproduce at some point.

I thought I might offer the diverse opinionated folks of NSG a chance to convince me that I am a complete fool for going down Academia Avenue, that whatever doctorate I receive is ultimately worthless, meaningless, or a counterproductive waste of time, or otherwise offer critique of the nature of, existence of, utility of, value attached to, and the social, economic, and cultural problems created by doctoral degrees

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whBrTOzj0Kw

Go to grad school the economy sucks.

Or more precisely, it is hard for anyone without a similar level of expertise in the field to judge you by anything except the degrees you got.
Well, as someone has mentioned, they have grants. However, it should be kept in mind that grants are not profits, but government's handouts - so they're primarily driven by political considerations rather than merits.


That is kind of sad and lonely, to be out on a branch of human knowledge beyond the ken of most of humanity.
Oh the great oracle I fall down on my knees und pray.
No, it's just that your knowledge is more obscure than Star Trek, and isn't put to any quantifiable use. Sometimes, as with chemistry, it promises a small chance of paying off in the future. Other times, as with history, it will never pay off, and is just being shuffled around for your own amusement.

"Graduate student for life" would be OK except for the fact that I would want to be able to save money eventually, perhaps even reproduce at some point.

You will never be financially ready for children. Once you accept that, it's all good. Besides, I think it's a pretty wonderful thing for kids to grow up with parents who are still students, at any age.

Sure, you've got to weigh different considerations. But do you want to save money and have a 3500 square foot house in a posh neighbourhood, never really getting to enjoy it because you're working 18 hr days to pay the mortgage...or do you want something a little more practical?

The student life is lacking in some areas, rich in others. All depends on your priorities...and in either situation you can still raise children.

Well, as someone has mentioned, they have grants. However, it should be kept in mind that grants are not profits, but government's handouts - so they're primarily driven by political considerations rather than merits.



Actually a lot of grants are from private bodies - some are driven by particular special interests from NGOs, some are driven by charities wanting to find soluations for the various ills of society and a large number come from private industry wishing to develope new procedures, products and ideas that they can then market. Some aspects may not have immediate practical application but instead form the groundworkd for later products - hence why companies like funding universities to do the work for them.

"Graduate student for life" would be OK except for the fact that I would want to be able to save money eventually, perhaps even reproduce at some point.
Not going to happen.

PhDs reproduce asexually.

Actually a lot of grants are from private bodies -
Some do, but from what I know, most private bodies are rather interested in hiring the promising researchers to be able to claim patent on their work.

have i mentioned recently that we're a group of disproportionately over-educated motherfuckers?

No one has time for relationships either :D

Silly, don't delete your posts. The grass is always greener. So do what you enjoy. If you don't really enjoy school anymore because you're getting stressed out about these things, then maybe you should take a break. If these things are stressing you out simply because you feel they SHOULD be, and you really, really like what you're doing, then fuck it.

have i mentioned recently that we're a group of disproportionately over-educated motherfuckers?
Formally or informally, it's a truth.

No one has time for relationships either :D

Silly, don't delete your posts. The grass is always greener. So do what you enjoy. If you don't really enjoy school anymore because you're getting stressed out about these things, then maybe you should take a break. If these things are stressing you out simply because you feel they SHOULD be, and you really, really like what you're doing, then fuck it.
Ha! Nah, I'm taking the long view here. To me, really, I look at the end of that process, and it looks a lot easier to find someone to be with on a long-term basis, spawn younglings, et cetera as a professor than as a graduate student.

So I see reasons not to be a graduate student forever. It's a good life, but I can see it growing old on me later. 5-10 years of total graduate school will be quite enough - so I'd like to spend a little while as a graduate student, then be a professor forever, dragging my emeritus centenarian self over to teach the odd class, leaf through a few journals, and call it a day.

There's nothing else I would rather be doing right now than be a graduate student. I'm 25 now; it seems like it might be possible for me to have my doctorate at 28-30, and that's not terribly late in life.

Useless?

Not so sure about that, but if you...

1. can't stand the thought of studying just one thing for two or three years
2. don't like going still further into debt
3. don't have a relatively immediate gain to attribute to the new degree (such as a jump up a pay scale)
4. don't need to impress anyone who isn't impressed by anything but an M.D. anyway

...I wouldn't bother.

I don't have one, therefore useless.

Ha! Nah, I'm taking the long view here. To me, really, I look at the end of that process, and it looks a lot easier to find someone to be with on a long-term basis, spawn younglings, et cetera as a professor than as a graduate student.
Ur too monetaristic.
Professors are the benchmark of boring, students are the benchmark of fun. It may not always be true, but it's our stereotype. Telling you're a student always causes a better reaction than telling you're whatever your job/degree is, tested.


then be a professor forever, dragging my emeritus centenarian self over to teach the odd class, leaf through a few journals, and call it a day.
Yeah, tenure is the one attractive thing in an academic career. Anywhere else, you'll be pushed out to give the way to new generations, who are smarter and better than you.
On the other hand, with a professional degree, you may well be freelancing by that age, which pays well and in some professions lets you work at home or just anywhere you wish. You'd also be able to save up a lot more to support yourself.


There's nothing else I would rather be doing right now than be a graduate student. I'm 25 now; it seems like it might be possible for me to have my doctorate at 28-30, and that's not terribly late in life.
I'm 29 now, master/professional, and I don't feel like I'd rather be a PhD. I'm in a higher position than a beginner PhD, earn probably twice more than a PhD in my area, already have well more than my salary in savings, and, just life-position-wise, I start to feel the signs of a midlife crisis. You'll just be getting your degree by then.

Why a PhD is useless?

Well my uncle has a PhD in entomology and still can't explain why Webster's is so sure that 'polite' is derived from the Middle English polish and not the Greek polis

It depends. Do you like university? Do you want the best possible education? Do you want a career that requires or greatly benefits from having a PHD?

Why a PhD is useless?

Well my uncle has a PhD in entomology and still can't explain why Webster's is so sure that 'polite' is derived from the Middle English polish and not the Greek polis

That's because his degree is in the study of insects. Now, had his degree been in etymology, you'd have some delicious irony there.

Unless you were joking.

"Graduate student for life" would be OK except for the fact that I would want to be able to save money eventually, perhaps even reproduce at some point.
I'm saving money and I'm in grad school. Granted I'm not saving *a lot* of money, but I'm not doing too bad. By the end, (with any luck) I can probably have enough money for a downpayment on a house.

That's because his degree is in the study of insects. Now, had his degree been in etymology, you'd have some delicious irony there.

Unless you were joking.

Of course I was.

I couldn't possibly give a serious answer to why a PhD is useless.

Depends on what you're doing. In some fields, additional experience actually working in the field is worth many, many times more than a few years of additional coursework; you're going to learn more on-the-job than you ever would studying it in the classroom. As a result, the relative value of a PhD is a lot lower; it's likely the additional years of work will end up benefiting you more both in terms of earnings as well as for future career prospects, especially if you plan on going to teach at a collegiate level.

The opposite is true in other fields; sometimes, you're not going to have a chance of pursuing anything worthwhile without the additional study a PhD provides. It might even be impossible to get a job in your field without it, and even if you do many opportunities may be unavailable (or, even worse, it may simply be impossible to pursue an advanced degree once you've started working.

Read this: http://www.phdcomics.com/ and if afterward you STILL want to get a PhD, congrats, you're just as nutty as the rest of us poor fools.

Read this: http://www.phdcomics.com/ and if afterward you STILL want to get a PhD, congrats, you're just as nutty as the rest of us poor fools.
There is British Humour, and there's humor, and there are in-jokes, and there's Dilbert, and there is German humor, and there are autistic jokes, and there's Uncyclopedia, and there's plain unfunny, and there's extra-unfunny, and then there is this PhD comic.

If you find it funny, perhaps the PhD career might indeed be for you.



No, it's not that it fails. Uncyc fails, this does what it intends to. Rather, it takes a so specific similarity of mind to the creator to laugh at it, that it's a diagnosis.

Read this: http://www.phdcomics.com/ and if afterward you STILL want to get a PhD, congrats, you're just as nutty as the rest of us poor fools.
I really enjoy PHD comics, actually. Think it's hilarious.