Which academic fields tend to have the most interesting people?

[Usehername]

Ever since I discovered you plotted your academic career from an early age, I have been flabagasted, discombombulated and, I confess, disillusioned. You are the opposite side of the Moon. I person so different from myself I can't begin to understand you. And I can't begin to change you. I can't even begin to improve you. And yet to yourself you are completely normal. And even your friends find you normal. And yet here you are, popping up day after day.

I did the opposite of deciding my career from an early age.

Victor, are you just using me as a foil and inventing a narrative to say something you want to say? That's not nice.

 

[Haight]

I would say it's in the field where Jonathan Goldsmith earned his degree.

 

[Mole]

I did the opposite of deciding my career from an early age.

Victor, are you just using me as a foil and inventing a narrative to say something you want to say? That's not nice.

I understood you to say recently that you were concerned about your academic career from an early age. Plainly I misunderstood you.

Perhaps you might like to correct me and tell us how you do see your academic career.

 

[FDG]

My reply was American-centric, but it's not in the slightest bit personal. This "POV" of mine is about as common as postmodernist worldviews in American academia. Respectfully, your POV doesn't see the American system.

I'm not talking about "relatively low" earnings, I'm talking about signing loan papers that will put you so far in debt that it's mathematically impossible to climb out of it with your degree, and there's no bankruptcy option.

He didn't ask for a financial/actuarial computation. He asked WHERE THE MOST INTERESTING PEOPLE LIE. So your answer is completely off the mark, IMHO.

If he were asking "do you think getting a phd in X field by going deep into debt is a good career choice", then maybe we could start with excel.

Regardless, I do agree that it's never a good idea to go for an unfunded phd. You're working, so you must be paid.

 

[ygolo]

I think I'm just going to pursue academia. I'm lucky in that it is a relatively accessible field to me.

So, I'm wondering, in your estimation, which fields tend to have the most interesting types of people?

Well, interest is a subjective thing, I believe. What makes people interesting to you?

There is this notion of Holland Codes ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holland_Codes)

Frankly, I haven't read Hollands book. Nor do I know what the theory is based on. But it is a theory that nevertheless groups descriptions of peoples traits, likes, and vocations.

Also, beyond the intrinsic value each academic field has, what is supposed to be the value of various academic fields? Eg

Hmm, that is an interesting question too. For me value is ultimately, subjective as well. What do you value? What do you want your contribution to society to be?

But if you asking how much do things pay, then there is the following list to consider:
http://money.usnews.com/money/careers/articles/2010/12/06/the-50-best-careers-of-2011
But also keep in mind that list is essentially base off of 2009 BLS data from 2008. Things are not going to look nearly as rosy as they made things out to be for those professions.

 

[animenagai]

Philosophy has some really great and interesting people, but tbh, if it's not what you want to do with your life, don't do it.

 

[King sns]

Are you spending tens of thousands of dollars to become an "Interesting Person"?

I think you should write a book... kind of like AJ Jacobs with "A Year of Living Biblically" where he lived the bible for a year and "The Know It All" where he tried to become more intelligent. You could write something similar about your expensive journey to becoming more interesting.

And, interestingly enough, it could be an interesting book, so the author, (you) would then become an "Interesting Person" by default.
You may want to minor in marketing- increase book sales to pay off those student loans.

 

[Usehername]

He didn't ask for a financial/actuarial computation. He asked WHERE THE MOST INTERESTING PEOPLE LIE. So your answer is completely off the mark, IMHO.

If he were asking "do you think getting a phd in X field by going deep into debt is a good career choice", then maybe we could start with excel.

Regardless, I do agree that it's never a good idea to go for an unfunded phd. You're working, so you must be paid.

With the way he opened the OP, yes, you are absolutely right.

With the way he was potentially deciding a life decision, well, I wish people who knew the american loan system would've shaken me and told me the math before because I would've looked elsewhere. As it happens, I'm totally funded and great and in zero debt, but I didn't go into this making an informed decision. I just happened to have good luck.

 

[Usehername]

I understood you to say recently that you were concerned about your academic career from an early age. Plainly I misunderstood you.

Perhaps you might like to correct me and tell us how you do see your academic career.

Thanks, Victor.

I'd bet that there are legitimate gaps in academia, and I think neurolinguistics is one. Most of them, though . . . to buy into student loans means giving up on other dreams like raising a family or, for some people, living in the same city/province/state as your significant other.

 

[Orangey]

Most of them, though . . . to buy into student loans means giving up on other dreams like raising a family or, for some people, living in the same city/province/state as your significant other.

Or being psychologically healthy...

As for the OP, it's really an absurd question in the first place - for obvious reasons. Add to that the fact that it seems like he/she is looking to go into an academic career for whimsical reasons (and not because he/she has a real burning passion for some very specific subject, which is THE ONLY reason to go into academia), and your advice about loans/long-term finances is very apt.

To the OP: the whole thing is really a pain in the ass, and unless you absolutely cannot stand the idea of doing anything else besides researching [insert relevant and sufficiently specific topic], then it's not a good career move financially or psychologically, regardless of whether the people are interesting or not. There's a shit ton of bullshit that you have to put up with on top of any real research that you do, and it makes a solid majority of people - who for the most part were always classic academic over-achievers - fall into depression/anxiety/other mental illness. It's really not something to enter into lightly.

Read this - 100 Reasons NOT to Go to Graduate School.

 

[Giggly]

I think all of them.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

Isn't interesting entirely relative to you? How am I supposed to tell you?

Or being psychologically healthy...

As for the OP, it's really an absurd question in the first place - for obvious reasons. Add to that the fact that it seems like he/she is looking to go into an academic career for whimsical reasons (and not because he/she has a real burning passion for some very specific subject, which is THE ONLY reason to go into academia), and your advice about loans/long-term finances is very apt.

To the OP: the whole thing is really a pain in the ass, and unless you absolutely cannot stand the idea of doing anything else besides researching [insert relevant and sufficiently specific topic], then it's not a good career move financially or psychologically, regardless of whether the people are interesting or not. There's a shit ton of bullshit that you have to put up with on top of any real research that you do, and it makes a solid majority of people - who for the most part were always classic academic over-achievers - fall into depression/anxiety/other mental illness. It's really not something to enter into lightly.

Read this - 100 Reasons NOT to Go to Graduate School.

I don't know what I'd do other than academia. Also, I actually want to be a professor, so I'm infuriated by the idea of something getting in the way of research the way I've heard many complain.

As for that blog, it has valid points, but it needs to be filtered for its bias and the fact that there's some obvious preaching to the choir going on there.

 

[Usehername]

I don't know what I'd do other than academia. Also, I actually want to be a professor, so I'm infuriated by the idea of something getting in the way of research the way I've heard many complain.

As for that blog, it has valid points, but it needs to be filtered for its bias and the fact that there's some obvious preaching to the choir going on there.

1. The "I was born to do this" feeling is saturated, and that makes people desperate and act in ways that they wouldn't otherwise act

2. You can't keep a teaching gig if you can't publish. Bleak Job prospects mean that even SLACs can be picky and demand high research output alongside stellar teaching. Many SLACs also expect you to host students at your home to build up that community. The problem is that you can't publish if you prioritize your teaching, which means you can't teach because publishing is that important. Getting published means reading 40 hours / week to stay current and it means writing a lot.

The only way you can properly do both is if you're SINGLE with NO KIDS and you see teaching as your extra-curricular passion. BTW it takes me at least 20 minutes to properly grade 1 paper, so multiply that by how many students you expect to have and decide if you want that to be your extra-curricular of life.

This is why people complain about teaching. Rarely do people hate teaching.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

1. The "I was born to do this" feeling is saturated, and that makes people desperate and act in ways that they wouldn't otherwise act

2. You can't keep a teaching gig if you can't publish. Bleak Job prospects mean that even SLACs can be picky and demand high research output alongside stellar teaching. Many SLACs also expect you to host students at your home to build up that community. The problem is that you can't publish if you prioritize your teaching, which means you can't teach because publishing is that important. Getting published means reading 40 hours / week to stay current and it means writing a lot.

The only way you can properly do both is if you're SINGLE with NO KIDS and you see teaching as your extra-curricular passion. BTW it takes me at least 20 minutes to properly grade 1 paper, so multiply that by how many students you expect to have and decide if you want that to be your extra-curricular of life.

This is why people complain about teaching. Rarely do people hate teaching.

So what do you wish you had chosen to do instead?

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

Like Userhername, I think the question is flawed but for a different reason. Your assessment of how interesting a person is depends on how interesting the field is. A mathematician's thoughts and perceptions of the world don't interest me nearly as much as a psychologists (especially a social psychologist), whereas some of my friends in programming and mathematics would say the opposite. Maybe you think a person's thoughts can be separated from how "interesting" they are, but I don't think that's realistic.

 

[highlander]

I hate our math faculty...they are too perfect. I want to dig up dirt on one of the professors and throw it in his face just as he goes through yet another quadratic equation seamlessly. I imagine I'd shout "do you teach your mistress math!" as I threw the incriminating photos in his direction. Nothing would give me more pleasure...

I think you should study Chamber Music.

 

[Usehername]

So what do you wish you had chosen to do instead?

I'm a big believer in choosing a lifestyle first. And banishing the concept of a career, because it holds onto days past where career meant a singular career and I think people can't shake that singular concept so it builds so much anxiety in making the one right choice. Everyone has 7+ careers now except for doctors/nurses/lawyers/teachers/academics, so I think finding a new word for career is helpful, one that acknowledges the multiple careers people have. The reason why so many people default into those listed above is because those are the only ones that work in the old career system. Yet they're also the most unstable, you know? They're all about to bust and need a real overhaul.


Anyway, when you have an idea of the kind of lifestyle you want, you find a work-trajectory, pursuit-of-expertise vision that fits within that lifestyle.

So I'd ask: what kind of lifestyle do I want?
I don't want to be a slow pace SAHM, and I don't want backbreaking stress of being a surgeon or something.

I want intellectual challenges, I don't mind working 70 hour weeks, but I need to be in control of my time. So I'd look around me and see people that have what I want and people that have jobs that get in the way of my big priorities.

So I notice that I can't open a brick-and-mortar business because I have to stick to my store hours. But there are lots of businesses where you don't need a brick-and-mortar storefront, where you can be autonomous with your time while working a lot.

You know?

I'd also look for Venn Diagrams of my areas of excellence/skills, and find an area where I'm already a built-in strength just by my unique combination of skills.

e.g. a 2nd language, a skill with computers, an ability to write well, etc.


Basically I can just do this in academia, and I wouldn't be here if I hadn't found a gap where my skills meet in a way that there's a genuine demand for them.

 

[Usehername]

-
This guy:

"I'm a 29-year-old computer scientist interested in why some people lead successful, enjoyable, meaningful lives, while so many others do not. Being a geek, I'm not satisfied with simplistic slogans (e.g., "follow your passion!") or conventional wisdom (e.g., student success requires stress). Instead, I dive deeper, looking to decode underlying patterns of success, in all their nuanced glory."

http://calnewport.com/blog/2011/08/11/the-career-craftsman-manifesto/


On Foundational Philosophies

In 2008, I introduced the Zen Valedictorian philosophy, which argued that it’s possible to lead a student life that’s successful and impressive at the same time that it’s low-stress and enjoyable. All my student advice comes back to achieving this goal.

It came to my attention recently that I don’t have a similar clarifying vision for my career advice. If the Zen Valedictorian is the epitome of what I think student life should be, what’s my equivalent abstraction for maximizing life after graduation?

The need for this answer led me to develop the newest entrant to the Study Hacks canon: the Career Craftsman. I introduce this philosophy below in a pithy manifesto format. These ideas are a work in progress, and the propositions that follow mark the start of my exploration of this new direction in my thinking.

A Career Manifesto
Career advice has fallen into a terribly simplistic rut. Figure out what you’re passionate about, then follow that passion: this idea provides the foundation for just about every guide to improving your working life.

The Career Craftsman rejects this reductionist drivel.

The Career Craftsman understands that “follow your passion and all will be happy” is a children’s tale. Most people don’t have pre-existing passions waiting to be unearthed. Happiness requires more than solving a simple matching problem.

The Career Craftsman knows there’s no magical “right job” waiting out there for you. Any number of pursuits can provide the foundation for an engaging life.

The Career Craftsman believes that compelling careers are not courageously pursued or serendipitously discovered, but are instead systematically crafted.

The Career Craftsman believes this process of career crafting always begins with the mastery of something rare and valuable. The traits that define great work (autonomy, creativity, impact, recognition) are rare and valuable themselves, and you need something to offer in return. Put another way: no one owes you a fulfilling job; you have to earn it.

The Career Craftsman believes that mastery is just the first step in crafting work you love. Once you have the leverage of a rare and valuable skill, you need to apply this leverage strategically to make your working life increasingly fulfulling. It is then — and only then — that you should expect a feeling of passion for your work to truly take hold.

The Career Craftsman thinks the idea that “societal expectations” are trying to hold you down in a safe but boring career path is a boogeyman invented to sell eBooks. You don’t need courage to create a cool life. You need the type of valuable skills that let you write your own ticket.

The Career Craftsman never expects to love an entry level job (or to stay in that job long before moving up).

The Career Craftsman thinks “is this my calling?” is a stupid question.

The Career Craftsman is data-driven. Admire someone’s career? Work out exactly how they made it happen. The answers you’ll find will be less romantic but more actionable than you might expect.

The Career Craftsman believes the color of your parachute is irrelevant if you take the time to get good at flying the damn plane in the first place.

#####

Here are some past articles that can help you adopt the Career Craftsman philosophy in your own working life. Expect many more to come:

 

[FDG]

e.g. a 2nd language, a skill with computers, an ability to write well, etc.

Well it's too bad that in a globalized/international work market (say in the european job market) there will be a tremendous amount of young very educated people with a good command of 3-4 languages, programming skills, deep technical knowledge of the subject matter, basic work experience etc.

so, what do I want to say? I just think that the OP's approach isn't that bad (even though it's far from mine), because everywhere you look, you're likely going to face an extrordinary amount of competition. Thus, it's better to think about what you enjoy doing and eventually even the kind of people you will meet.

 

[Orangey]

Well it's too bad that in a globalized/international work market (say in the european job market) there will be a tremendous amount of young very educated people with a good command of 3-4 languages, programming skills, deep technical knowledge of the subject matter, basic work experience etc.

so, what do I want to say? I just think that the OP's approach isn't that bad (even though it's far from mine), because everywhere you look, you're likely going to face an extrordinary amount of competition. Thus, it's better to think about what you enjoy doing and eventually even the kind of people you will meet.

But this is the deal in the U.S. - you think you have a passion for the type of arcane research you'd expect in higher echelons of academia, but you go there only to find out that it is one of the most intellectually repressive environments of fear and loathing that you could have possibly imagined. IF you can put up with that because you love your subject that much, fine. But if not, if that's not your cup of tea and you just want to be an intellectual dilettante like the romantic picture they paint in undergrad, then do not go. You have to really be willing to eat a lot of shit to make it anywhere, and even then it's not by any means guaranteed that you'll find sustainable employment. Plus you'll most likely hate the shit out of what you do.

That's why I hate apologetics like, "well, it's like that everywhere else in this economy." No, it's not exactly like that everywhere else. It's a particularly bad type of shithole that you're getting yourself into, and you should be well aware of that before making the decision to go.