Why shouldn't I get a PhD?

[Ufffdaaa]

Why shouldn't I get a PhD?

I found myself asking Google this question the other day. What are your honest answers, people? 

NOTE: You don't need to focus on the fact that I applied to English PhD programs (although you can). I meant this as a question that could apply to any PhD applicant. 

[fuzzylogician]

It's time-consuming, you lose years of potential experience and earnings at another better-paying job, the job market stinks; you are incredibly likely to have to settle for a while, maybe for your entire career, if you're even lucky enough to get a job. It's mentally exhausting, it is solitary, the feedback cycle can take years, you'll experience constant rejection, you'll be required to do things no one trained you for (like teach), there will be times when you won't know why the hell you're doing it, you'll be competing with incredibly smart and motivated people who are just as desperate as you. You may encounter bad advising, bad teaching, unfriendly cohorts, prejudice of any number of kinds, you may be forced to live on a tight budget for many years. Just off the top of my head. 

[timetobegin]

A PhD is a decision you need to make because you're genuinely driven by the topic and the research. It isn't a 'I'm doing this to upgrade my life' degree - you can manage that with a master's program, here. And there isn't some big 'moneymaker' job at the end of it, like going to medical school (so it's not a 'if I tough this out, I'll be making 400k a year' career path). It's a long 3-7 years of your life; you do it because you want to, and come to terms with the fact there's no guaranteed high-paying job at the end of it.

So IMO, you shouldn't do a PhD if you:

• Are only doing it in some bid to upgrade your life (unless you've always worked in academia/research and the PhD is actually a way for you to 'level up' into a job you want). But in terms of just wanting it for the prestige, maybe think it over.
•  Aren't into research, or writing long, often tedious proposal applications.
• Aren't interested in dealing with a highly competitive job market, or a not-steady career into your 30s. You'll probably move more than the average person, and change jobs. Most of your non-PhD friends will be getting raises, buying houses, etc, while you're still a student. Your income won't be a steady salary year-to-year, if you stay in academia - and the pressure to publish is ridiculously high. I don't think PhD-jobs are your 'typical' 9-5 job (again, YMMV), so it's something to think about before heading down that path.
•  If you don't need one. If the jobs you enjoy don't require a PhD, then don't waste your time or money. There can be social pressure to get a PhD in research-based careers, but if you're happy where you are, then ignore what others are saying.

Edited January 28, 2018 by timetobegin

[Warelin]

You shouldn't get a PHD if you're doing it because:
 

• You think it would make your parents or someone else happy.
• You're trying to figure out what you want to do with your life.
• You want to delay student loans.
• You're doing it for a higher education status. (This is not a competition; the one with the highest degree isn't always the smartest)
• You think it would lead to immediate results.
• You think it guarantees tenure.
• You aren't comfortable with the possibility of failure and with the word 'no'
• You're applying just because a professor said you should
• There is another job you would prefer doing.

[DiscoTech]

5 hours ago, Wooshkuh said:

Why shouldn't I get a PhD?

I found myself asking Google this question the other day. What are your honest answers, people? 

NOTE: You don't need to focus on the fact that I applied to English PhD programs (although you can). I meant this as a question that could apply to any PhD applicant. 

I guess I'll focus on the the fact that you applied to English PhD programs. Liberal arts programs are under tremendous pressure thanks to the rise of the businessman-university president (see University of Iowa, Purdue, etc ... and places like Wisconsin where the state government is doing everything it can to gut its state's flagship university). Anything that falls outside STEM or business is viewed as a source of cuts (or future cuts). People who have spent their entire careers figuring out how to goose quarterly profits are not going to be the ones to recognize the value of a grounding in the social sciences and humanities.

Unless one is going to one of the top programs in the country and/or is open to starting one's career in Europe or Canada, a PhD seems like a dicey proposition.

[00ber]

On 1/28/2018 at 10:14 AM, fuzzylogician said:

the feedback cycle can take years

@fuzzylogician Just curious, what exactly were you referring to here?

[fuzzylogician]

3 hours ago, 00ber said:

@fuzzylogician Just curious, what exactly were you referring to here?

You write a paper. It takes a year or two. You submit to a journal. You wait 6 months. You get your first round of reviews. You take a month or two to reply, you resubmit. You wait another 6 months. If you're lucky, you get an accept (with minor revisions), or you do the whole reply/wait again, or you get rejected and you start over. Eventually you get the paper into the journal, but now you want another year or two for it to appear in print. It'll take another year or two for anyone to write a reply, if any, and for people to start citing the work. It's a slow process. (Likewise for thesis writing, or grant-writing -- projects are at the 3-5 year scale usually.)