Reply to PhD - intelligence or persistence?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "PhD - intelligence or persistence? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Among the people i know with phds:

- they range from "above average" intelligence (not particularly bright, but not morons) to very bright
- they all have some family financial support.  Yes, they got funding and a small stipend (say, $15k). But the family money was what allowed them to not worry about not saving for retirement for those 10 years, or family bought them a cheap studio apartment when they were 23 so they already had a toe in the real estate market by the time they graduated, family money paid for periodic vacations during the tons of down time they had as an academic.  
- the liberal arts phds had an inflated sense of self.  While the stem phds were interested in their topic and spending a career in research, the liberal arts phds just wanted to be a plush teaching schedule and thought their obscure phd topic was a lot more important to the world than it really was. 
- they were all persistent, but that persistence was driven as much by the desire to not have to work in the real world (aided by their lack of financial stress) than anything else.  [/quote]

I only agree with the first bullet.  I'm from a modest background and did not have much financial support from my family at all during my Ph.D. program.  I can only think of one classmate who had parents pay entirely for a posh apt. in addition to other liberal financial support (she also never finished, incidentally).  Most lived frugally and did not take fancy vacations during grad school.  The last two bullets, frankly, are spoken like someone who doesn't have a Ph.D., but has spent a lot of time thinking about those that do.

I think for those of us who didn’t come from UMC families, getting a PhD represented upward mobility and it didn’t feel like a huge sacrifice to live like a grad student when you were getting paid to do something you loved and when you had a lot of control over your schedule.  I could cook and think at the same time and my favorite form of entertainment is still having people over for dinner and talking late into the night.  Not an expensive proposition.

I didn’t feel important (or deprived) — just lucky to find a place (in a world just as real as the corporate sector) where I enjoyed my work and found simpatico colleagues.  It wasn’t perfect — academia has its own set of problems and some real a-holes, but it was worth it, and that was true even with no financial support from family.  
[/quote]

I come from a MC/UMC background; I have a STEM PhD (computational physics).  My family paid for my college, but not my PhD.  My PhD was funded by a combination of State of NY, NSF and AFRL.  My collegues were in the same boat; I saw no correlation between family money and PhD Success.

And I saw brilliant people wash out -- they did not have the persistence.  Usually, they just disappeared.  I saw hard working but average people flame out, usually in the qualifying exams.

For the specific bullets:  
1) You need to be able to think on your feet (oral exams; defenses), and be persistent enough to work through a bad spell/burnout.  To me, a PhD means the person is reasonably bright, and will grind through the rough spots.

2) Family money is not required.  I finished my PhD with $2000 in the bank, and $5000 in loans.  No one gave me anything.  The thing is, my degree got my foot in the door at a reasonably high salary -- about 90K in today's dollars.  I now earn closer to 200K doing applied research.  I enjoy my job and am respected.  And, in the last 25 years, my net worth has gone from -$3000 to 1.5 Million.  With no family help.

3)  No comment.  I am in a STEM field.

4) I was persistent; I worked through tough times and arguments with my advisor.   I had very limited support from my family; I was living on 11K per year, but it was enough in the up-state NY town.  I pursued the doctorate not because I wanted to avoid the real world, but because I knew what I wanted to do in the real world.  Note that when I started, I thought I wanted to be a Professor, until I saw what they actually did.  [/quote]

I have a social science PhD and agree with all of this (although, I, unfortunately, do not make $200K ;-) )

For #4, this was very similar to me -- the career I wanted required a PhD, although ultimately I changed my mind about said career.  There were rough patches during my time in grad school, and I will admit to pushing through some of them in part because I was a young grad student in the middle of the recession in the midwest and even though I think I could have gotten a decent job, there definitely was some security in my 5 year fellowship. So, although I don't generally think #4 is true, it was a little true for me. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics