By now, probably everyone has read that strange moan of anxiety about social media titled “I’m a serious academic, not a professional Instagrammer” — or at least, if you’re an academic who enjoys a good eye-roll over someone with a massive 2×4 rammed up his butt, you’ve read it. It’s the one where an anonymous young Ph.D. student whines about people on Twitter or taking selfies or using instagram or writing blogs…in an anonymous blog post. They make a lot of silly complaints about people using hashtags at conferences and how the powers-that-be keep telling them how important their social media presence is to their career (which is really weird: my experience has been that administrators dread the fact that professors are speaking publicly about their experiences at their institution, and would love to be able to bottle that genie back up). There has been a flood of rebuttals to the fundamental wrongness of the “serious academic”, and I’ll just mention The Tattooed Professor, Meny Snoweballes, and Dean Burnett as good examples.
I want to take a different tack. I feel for this person.
It’s a really tough time to be a starting academic — it’s always a tough time. We get so many demands. Publish. Publish lots. Write grants. Write many grants, because almost all of them will be rejected. Teach. Every course is a challenge, and some of us have to teach multiple courses per term. Serve on committees. Attend meetings. Review papers. Dance, monkey, dance, or you’ll never get an academic job (you probably won’t anyway), you’ll never get tenure, you’ll never get promoted.
And then all those voluble assholes on the internet are adding pressure to tweet or write blogs or get out of the lab and talk to the public? Oh, hell no. Let me just fill up my lab notebook with numbers and gel photos and data, and pay me to do that. I’m running as fast as I can to just keep up without throwing these damned social obligations on my back.
I sympathize. Really, I do. There are lots of things I don’t like about my job (die, committee meetings, die), but I’m obligated to do them, so I do them. No matter what your job, there are always inevitable requirements to occasionally shovel out the stables. Academia in particular is rife with an excess of expectations, and everyone knows it.
But the first thing I have to point out is that social media isn’t one of them. You won’t get tenure for your Twitter activity, and in fact there is an academic bias against outreach and social activity and public engagement. “Serious academic’s” bleat is less an act of rebellion than a performative act of solidarity with staid traditional academics. It’s a person looking in terror at the chaos and uncertainty ahead of them in academia, and picking what they think is the side of the establishment…and they aren’t even certain that that is the right side to pick, witness the fact that their essay is anonymous.
But the most important thing I have to say is that they’re doing it wrong. They’re focusing on the obstacles and forgetting about the purpose. Nobody goes into academia for a love of grant writing and committee meetings. We don’t even go into it over the thrilling prospect of tweeting to a conference hashtag.
We go into it for the joy of the discipline. Remember that?
Personally, I signed on to this life because of some great experiences in science. I was lucky and was employed in a lot of extracurricular science stuff through college, and it was that that was more influential than my classes, I’m sad to say. I was doing animal care and assisting in animal surgeries in the department of physiology and biophysics — lowering electrodes into a living brain was enthralling. I worked with Johnny Palka on fly pupae, watching nerves grow into the developing wing. I did mouse brain histology in the psychology department with Geoff Clarke. I was Golgi staining fetal tissue with Jenny Lund and counting dendritic spines. These were the events that convinced me that I wanted to do more.
I went off to graduate school with Chuck Kimmel and discovered zebrafish embryos. Do you people even know how beautiful an embryo is? Exploring how cells behave in the complex environment of the organism is what kept me going.
Very serious academics
I did a post-doc with Mike Bastiani and saw that grasshopper embryos are just as beautiful.
Then my first job at Temple University, where I had teaching obligations for the first time, showed me that I really enjoyed teaching. So I’ve followed that star, too. It all works. At every step, pursue the joy, while never forgetting to also do the duties. Some people don’t enjoy the teaching, so they focus more on the research. Some people, believe it or not, have a talent for management, so they move into administration, or into running large labs.
And some people write books. Or make videos. Or compose music or poetry about esoteric subjects. Or write blogs. It’s all good. You don’t have to do it all. You just have to always keep your attention focused on what brings you to your bliss.
Don’t let other people tell you what you must do with your life, and avoid the temptation to lecture others on what is the one, true, proper way to be an academic. If you find deep satisfaction in grinding out data, do it. If you enjoy teaching, do it. If you enjoy communicating to the public about that weird stuff you’re doing, do it.
I feel sad for “Serious Academic”. So young, and so certain of the one true path for all. He reminds me of someone.
“You are fettered,” said Scrooge, trembling. “Tell me why?”
“I wear the chain I forged in life,” replied the Ghost. “I made it link by link, and yard by yard; I girded it on of my own free will, and of my own free will I wore it.”
Try being the “Joyful Academic” for a while. It can be hard, especially in the current climate, but if nothing else, being true to yourself is more rewarding than trying to be true to someone else’s ideal.
People following their bliss is why we have a marginally employed lost generation drowning in debt. Virtually all people need to hear to kick the hell out of academia and do something employable.
‘fess up PZ.
Which one is you?
#1: People who don’t persevere to find happiness in their lives (while also doing the mundane hard stuff to make it possible) is exactly how we end up with bitter jerks like you.
#2: You see Bill Trevarrow holding a fish net over someone’s face? I’m the someone.
No, the extraordinarily rapid casualization of academic labor and shunting of funds towards administration, a difficult and often hostile environment for academic unions, the defunding of public education, predatory lending, changes in bankruptcy laws and debt policies brought about by banks and the politicians they’ve corrupted, and the failure of the US to pay for students’ higher education are the reasons for that. This has all created a situation that’s bad for professors, students, education and research, academic freedom, and society as a whole. People like you think the response is for individuals to just give in; others think we have to work to change the system so that, for example, people suited by talent and interest to academic teaching and research can choose that career and have a decent and secure livelihood.
(This will be my only response to you. Your muddled thinking annoys me.)
One problem with this is that there are those of us who seriously cannot be a joyful academic on Twitter, Facebook, etc. Some of us find that oppressive and depressing. But then are told by everyone and sundry that it doesn’t matter, you need to be on (fill in particular social media being discussed at the time) in order to be successful.
I don’t say I am not on Twitter because I am a serious academic. I say I am not on Twitter because I don’t want to be. Yes, it does hamper me in my life as a writer; I have to live with that, because the idea of being on Twitter and/or Facebook is so revolting that I literally gag at the thought. I choose not to be there, and no, do not tell me how fun it is. For you, yes. For me? No. The problem is that many of us who don’t like to be there are treated as though there is something seriously wrong with us, and that we are hopelessly deluded and, yes, stupid. I am neither. I simply do not like social media. So sue me, mock me, whatever, but don’t tell me that I am wrong. I have heard it all.
The only way for me to be a joyful academic is to be allowed the freedom to make my own choices about how to be a joyful academic. I am not conforming to a traditionalist structure; I am responding to my own preferences. No, I am not a Luddite. I use plenty of modern technology and enjoy (and hate) it as much as anyone else. I simply choose not to be part of those aspects of the digital world that I do not enjoy.
But that’s exactly how I’m saying you should be!
Yes, I agree. I read that from your article. But what I am saying is that possibly many of these “serious academics” are responding to how many people tell them “you have to”. Especially if they are young, they may lack the confidence to face that down with “I don’t wanna”. So they say they are a serious academic.
Thanks for reminding me where this came from.
@SC
All that can be true and doesn’t touch what I said. the vast majority of people are not suited to do academic work and they should be discouraged from entering the field because of that; there isn’t enough work to go around. Every single factor you just listed is a problem. It still doesn’t mean that the US isn’t producing an absolutely absurd amounts of PhD’s. There’s something like a 5 to 1 ratio for the number of PhD holders and the number of full time academic positions available. It certainly doesn’t that administrators take a bigger slice than they should and the proliferation of the adjunct system is a place of major concern but you do away with those factors and my point remain. There’s too many candidates and not enough jobs.
This isn’t about giving into the system, whatever that could possibly mean in this context. It is about making sure most people have the wherewithal to be able to change the system if they want to. Academia is so bleak that if you goal is to change it you shouldn’t be involved.
And for the record, I have no one but myself to blame for the rather large amount of student debt I occurred. No one forced me to try to pursue an academic career.
@Professor Myers
It’s misleading to hold “not following your bliss” is equivalent to “don’t persevere to find happiness in their lives.” I took ‘bliss’ to mean “perfect happiness” which in this context means the absolute preference that a person would have in choice of career. I didn’t take ‘bliss’ to mean “pursuing any career you can find happiness in.” These are two very different things and two very different end goals. Of course, people should aim to have a career they can find fulfilling and happiness in but at the same time they must take the facts on the ground into account.
Only the most gifted students should be encouraged to even to try to break into academia until such time as it gets better. All others should be encouraged to seek a more employable career path. In short, unless a physics student is absolutely amazing they should be encouraged to take up engineering instead.
And it’s rather presumptuous of you to imply that I haven’t found happiness in my career; I have. I love teaching. I just can’t make the finances work.
One problem, Mike, is the question of who gets to decide if they are absolutely amazing? That sort of assessment can be difficult to make, and it isn’t necessarily the absolutely amazing ones that are getting the jobs. Many absolutely amazing people go unemployed while good schmoozers get the jobs, and some of them will be great at it while others aren’t. I don’t think that would change if you said to send everyone who isn’t absolutely amazing to another, less crowded field (and then, of course, those fields will become overcrowded, and we’ll have to shift them again). In the real world, the good schmoozers will often be the ones deemed absolutely amazing…and often, it is the women who are seen as not absolutely amazing, even if they are amazing.
Young academics, like most academics, are funded by public money and student fees, this type of dissemination at ion is so ething to be encouraged (but not mandated). The public cannot access the academic literature, and social media can be a good tool for dissemination to a lay audience. New academics certainly should feel a duty to perform outreach, because ultimately that is about communicating with their funders.
At the end there is that sad little bit about people daring to voice an opinion via social media. I feel very sorry for someone who feels so cowed, because academia is dominated by people with loud or confident opinions. I fear they are likely to be eaten alive.
Mike Smith:
“I have no one but myself to blame for the rather large amount of student debt I occurred”
I wouldn’t be that harsh on myself, education should be free or at the very least not for-profit. You should blame the people who’ve been allowing capitalism to compromise culture and education.
I pay 350€ a semester for my German university education (up from 250€ since I started 12 semesters ago, admittedly), and that includes a public transportation ticket for the entire state that I would need anyway and which on its own would cost me more than 350€. The increase in semester fees is mostly due to poor negotiation by the student administration with public transportation companies.
I may end up a highly educated taxi driver, but at least I won’t be in debt.
I think P Z did a much better job on the balance than many do: I loved the phrase “At every step, pursue the joy, while never forgetting to also do the duties.”
The tricky bit, of course, is figuring out which bits are the *real* duties, and which are the momentary fads and fancies of the very large range of people who feel entitled to tell academics what to do.
I don’t do social media for my career, I do it for my own enjoyment… but if I don’t suck at it and if I share what I love about my work, it may also incidentally help my career.
My own phrasing of ‘follow your bliss’ is ‘first do the work that is worthwhile, and only then figure out how to get rewarded for it’. You need to know what the beancounters will count when it comes time for tenure and promotion, but you cannot live by counting beans. Do the work that (a) is pleasurable because it is the work you are made for and (b) leaves the world a better place than you find it… and then figure out how to make it countable.
I come from a different angle, but I think I get to the same place as PZ. I advise people to find work they can be good at, and put up with and find the satisfaction they can in it. I specifically advise against doing what you love because, in my experience, the mundane day to day nesessity of work robs it of joy. My job is farming, and i’m good at it. It can be rewarding, and there is an odd satisfaction to taking dirt, weather, fertilizer, knowlage and experience and turning a seed into something more. It is rewarding, but the day i dont have to show up to work im never looking back. I hate the mundane necessity of it. My passion, what I fill my non work, non family time with is falconry. I have thought about how to make money with the raptors I love. Maybe abatement, maybe education programs but I keep saying no because I don’t want to loose the passion to the mundane everydayness of work. I’m typing this one fingered because I have a new eyass kestrel eating a mouse on my glove, her reward for flying a short distsnce to a giant hairy monster. THAT is a simple joy.
Jacob, if I didn’t do what I love I wouldn’t be a vet tech. Today we are attempting to do 60 spay/neuter surgeries while being severely understaffed. Some of us will be staying late to try to reach this goal. Because we love our careers. If I didn’t absolutely love my field I’d quit. Long hours. Dangerous. Will never be wealthy. But this is my passion. And today we also saved a dog with a pyometra. So while I’ll probably be assisting in surgery until 7 pm I’m going to be having fun every second of it.
@15 I’m glad that works for you. Some people it does, but I not me. I worked as a kayak instructor, fell out of love with kayaking. I got my degree in engineering, stopped loving to tinker. 2 strikes is enough for me.
The “you should love the job you do” mantra is a nice idea, but it also provides cover for chronically and systematically undervaluing certain jobs. “Oh, it doesn’t pay much, but I love what I do.” It’s especially pernicious in helping fields – “I don’t get paid much and the hours are lousy, but I’m really making a difference in people’s lives and that’s worth so much to me.” It can be worth a lot to you AND you should get appropriately paid for it, but that whole “love it so much the pay doesn’t matter” has gone so far that there is backlash against people asking for appropriate pay as being “greedy” and “selfish” (see: every strike ever, especially teachers and healthcare workers)
Gah.
This is not about people unsuited for academic work.
No, you can’t “do away with those factors.” Those are the factors behind the shortage of full-time academic positions. It’s not that professors/instructors aren’t needed; it’s that they’ve defunded academe and casualized academic jobs. (There’s also the issue of students not being able to choose the field of study they want – I’ve taught a large number of business majors whose preference and passion was not business.)
Advocating that people abandon their desired career doesn’t address what is a structural problem and does nothing but lead to the continuation of that problem.
Nonsense. People should be able to pursue an academic career with the expectation of decent pay and security, and without a huge debt hanging over their heads. You’re blaming the victims, including yourself, and naturalizing the current situation. It’s one thing to be bitter or pessimistic about the possibilities for change;* it’s another to beat yourself and others up for the terrible crime of wanting to do important work that we love and make a decent living.
* This is one of the most promising moments we’ve seen in a long time. While many of the problems have become even more deeply rooted, the movements for change have made student debt and funding a major issue in the presidential election. And the election of Clinton, in the context especially of the movements surrounding Sanders, in some ways will/would create a favorable context for academic unions…
This is slightly off-topic, but when I was a grad student in California 40 years ago, I paid $100 per semester for my tuition at San Francisco State University. That’s it. 200 bucks a year for graduate schooling. At that time, 50% of educational funding was provided by the various governments. I recently read that it’s now down to 8%. There’s your problem. The property tax revolt that occurred in CA while I was there is where this all started. Cut taxes, cut taxes, cut taxes. Fuck the selfish bastards who only think of themselves, not of society.
Mike Smith
At least in Europe the lion’s share of PhD holders doesn’t work in academia. There’s all the medical professions, there’s the research departments of companies etc.
Zeppelin
Get off my lawn, kid!
I started on 163 Mark. It also took me 16 years to finish, though I had 2 kids, some major health issues and 3 semesters abroad (obligatory but not credited back then) in that time.
Carlie
Absolutely. And it means that people work, work, work until they break. And then people wonder how abuse of paients happens.
But “go where you make money” isn’t a good mantra either. In Germany, being a high school teacher (once you get a fixed position) is a well paid job and there are tons of people who start studying it because “it’s a secure job and you get a good pay” and not because they like kids and teaching. Not good. Not good.
First and foremost, I’m coming in cold, I’ve entirely refused to comment after reading comments. It’s late for me, obscenely late.
First, I’ll consider social media, which I personally proclaim as antisocial media.
Yeah, it’s that bad, for the sparse few who fail to indulge in the cloistersmurf.
Second, while I’m not a degreed professional, I’m quite conversant with such individuals, technically speaking.
I’ll happilyplain how I hold precisely zero degrees, but I’ll also hold a reasoned argument with professionals in specific degree fields and do quite well.
That and a quarter won’t get you a cup of corree, however, when I argue, I’ll stand quite well against a PhD or greater.
Or more simply, I’ll not dispute something I know little about, or even SME level argument.
I’m not the village idiot, I only play one on TV or something. ;)
I also hold many, many interest in many divergent fields.
Hence, at one point, not all that long ago, I spoke with a company commander, of, of all things, an infantry company, with a biologist, who worked with murine mammary carcinoma virus, in detail.
He was as shocked that I knew of such things in detail as I was at learning that an infantry company commaner knew such things.
Annoyingly, he retires shortly after and I was stuck with an MBA type.
I’ve since learned how to argue numbers, as annoying as it is, it’s more precise and in some ways, I’m both annoyed and rewarded.
On another front, I’ve had precisely two Generals (aka, wearing four stars, not less than that number, however, other junior Generals have said the very same thing), “Gee, I’m glad that you’re on *our* side.
Honest to heart attack serious there.
I’m exceptional at predicting certain actions, events or eventualities. It’s largely instinct, got an idea how it actually operates, it’s chess, 1000 levels in.
Not that I’m so proficient at a regular chess game. :/
This all said., I’m not pounding my own drum.
It’s a track record and evidenceish to my abilities to predict what a village idiot and what a village genius would do.
I’m good at figuring out human behavior in a trending environment, reading microexpressions, etc.
It’s quite literally why I’m alive today, along with a hell of a lot of my former teams.
Big Army actually held up my retirement for six months.
That said, I’m far from being a god. One second would disprove that, meeting me. :)
I’m just proficient at predicting certain population behavioral tenancies. That “certain” being a fair amount wide.
This specific instance, utterly predictable.
And honestly, boring as gravity.
@SC
I’m going to respond to the rest later but you can go to hell for calling me a victim and implying all that is entailed by that classification. No body violated my rights because I made a poor career. How fucking dare you to deny me agency in that way.
It’s entirely valid to make up your own mind on how to spend your time, but why on earth do you think that anyone else ought to (or would want to) read 442 words you wrote when you refuse to read theirs? Why bother to even write the comment?
@SC
1) yes it is about most people being unsuited to academia. But it’s also about there being economic/practical limits to what is viable to support. Academia produces the commodities of knowledge and trained professionals. In both cases the outcome eventually has to index back to profitability or the expense is a luxury. Our society absolutely can (should) be sinking more money into the field but it doesn’t change the core problem. It’s only viable to support so much basic research.
2) right now there is something like 5 to 1 between PhD and full time teaching gig. In my own field all full time gigs get 200+ applications for each open slot. We could do everything you say…socialize tuition, ban adjuncts, force more money into teaching etc. and while it would certainly help it won’t end the problem. So instead of the ratio being 5 to 1 it will end up 3 to 1; instead of 200+ applications we get 100+. It still means people should be actively discouraged from pursuing a career.
3) there’s difference between going for your dream (absolute preference) job, pursuing a job you find fulfilling and taking any job that pays the bills. I’m not saying you should do the third option. I’m saying you shouldn’t do the first one. You can do address structural issues while not condemning people to poverty by filling their heads with progressive fluff of “always follow your dreams.” Find something to do that can pay the bills AND you like doing, then fight for structural change.
To quote the German proverb: shit in one hand and grab hope with the other, and see which one fills up first.
Let me use an analogy to get what I’m getting at. There’s currently 750 MLB position available for players. Over the course of the year probably about 1200 players play in MLB between injury and the September roster expansion.
Now MiLB players are completely shafted in terms of pay; most make poverty level wages most don’t get large enough signing bonuses to make up for that. If I knew a very gifted baseball player who had a firm offer from a college I would advise him to not accept a draft slot unless he was taken in the first round or two. Likewise I would encourage a MiLBer to get out after a couple of years if they are not close to getting to MLB.
There’s absolutely structural changes that can (should) made that would help MiLBers be better off economically, I.e. bigger MLB rosters, more MLB teams, some dort wage basement, forcing more equitable sharing of profits etc. But at the end of the day the odds will be stacked against players and most should discouraged from trying. If a person loves baseball there are other ways besides being a player to make a career of it.
X) again go to hell for denying me agency. I knew this bleakness for years before trying to make a go of it. My failure is my own. I’ll be damn if someone takes that away from me. My rights have not been violated.
@10 Ik…
That’s a separate issue. Insert whatever fair way you think of determining the most amazing people are…it’s beside the point.
@12 Zepp…
Why on earth would I blame others for choice I made? What kind if moral abasement is that?
I meant debasement.
Mike Smith
Maybe don’t quote non-existing German proverbs at Germans…
No, it really isn’t.
You have no idea that that would be the case. You’re working under the assumption that the problem is that even if the current problems were resolved there would be insufficient need for instructors and professors to provide work for the majority of PhDs. But the need is there (as we can see from the huge army of adjuncts teaching multiple classes a semester at different institutions), and many students are being taught in ridiculously large classes after paying vast sums for tuition. What’s not there well-paying jobs with some security and good conditions. That’s what needs to change. Also, if public funding for advanced degrees and debt relief were available, people who finished grad school and were having a hard time finding work in academia would at least not be burdened with tens of thousands of dollars in debt. Of course this doesn’t mean that every PhD will get their dream position or an academic job, or that everyone who enters graduate school will finish successfully, but that’s true of anything. You might believe that if the problems I listed above were addressed, there would still be far too many PhDs for the positions available. I say let’s fix the problems – which, as I said, affect not just PhDs but the whole society – which will improve things drastically. If there are still far too many candidates for good jobs, we can address that then.
*I’m not advocating banning adjuncts. For some people, who don’t rely on teaching for their income, teaching part-time as an adjunct makes a lot of sense, and especially in more hands-on fields adjunct instructors who are professionals makes good sense. And the immediate goals are better pay, conditions, security, and inclusion for adjuncts. By the way, your tendency to describe changes that would make the system more just in violent terms – “force more money into teaching etc.” – is noted.
I hate this intellectual dishonesty. Neither I nor anyone else here has attempted to fill anyone’s head with any fluff. I’m very aware, as is PZ who’s posted about these issues many times, of the dire situation for new PhDs in a number of fields. Your first post said, rather unclearly, “Virtually all people need to hear to kick the hell out of academia and do something employable.” There was nothing in there about fighting for structural change or even acknowledging structural problems, and this and your subsequent posts blamed people who want to dedicate a good portion of their adult lives preparing for their chosen profession for structural forces beyond their individual (but not collective) control. This isn’t an individual-level problem, any more than war or poverty or unemployment generally are. It’s one thing to be clear with people who are considering their options about what their odds are currently of finding a good job in academia, while recognizing the awfulness of the situation and the need for structural change. It’s another to talk about this as though it was the result of people making the bad personal choice to pursue this career rather than another (most academics are, it should be obvious, very smart and dedicated people, though there aren’t really any realistic substitutes for being a scholar; it should also be noted that casualization, while extremely rapid in academia, is happening in a number of fields – there are no “safe” choices today).
Reading your remarks reminds me of how much I hate capitalism and what it does to people. I’m leaving this thread because a) you continue to be irritating and b) if anything were to go wrong during my surgery I wouldn’t want this to be my last discussion online.
SC
*delurk* I hope your surgery goes perfectly. I have been reading along and am still trying to wrap my head around how Mike Smith thinks life is exactly like a baseball game.
It’s not unexpected that our resident libertarian has a worldview modeled on an all male elite sports competition. That baseball contributes exactly zero to a society, and is actually just a game for which nobody should be paid millions of dollars might well be beyond his mental framework.
@Giliell
I heard that proverb years from a person who identified it as German. If it’s not German, fine whatever. Nothing I said hangs on it being the case. The sentiment, regardless of where it is from, is true. So point to you for being pedantic and not addressing the substance of my post, I guess.
@Tethys
1) I’m not a libertarian.
2) I don’t “model” my worldview on baseball. I just happen to be watching a game while writing that post and the MiLB example came to mind.
3) baseball is a great source of joy and, yes bliss for people. I’m of the opinion it’s one of three things America is going to be remember for 1000 years from now. And in any case any criticism you want to level at the player’s salaries I probably share. But unlike you I’m not going to blame them on “capitalism.” I place the blame for that squarely on the S. Court case that ruled against the Federal League (Federal Baseball Club v. National League) that had the power of the state crush other leagues and Marvin Miller’s harebrained free agency scheme that artificially increase players’ salaries. But do go on to explain to me baseball history and economics.
I haven’t mentioned capitalism, the history of baseball, or economics, and I’d rather feed mosquitoes than explain any of those things to someone who thinks crushing student loan debt is the result of silly people following their bliss. It’s because banks got congress to let them turn higher education into a profit center, coupled with erasing the majority of well paid manufacturing jobs, and businesses requiring a bachelors or higher for all positions.
Both subjects you need an education in….Quit pretending you are the smartest person here. More like in the bottom 20%.
@nerd
I say this with as much humility as I can muster I don’t know a lot and these very few topics I’m willing to claim this in but yes I almost certainly know baseball better than one here.
@tethys
No bank forced me, or anybody else, to take out any student loans. You can’t get around this fact.
And you implicitly brought up baseball history when you complained about salaries. News flash: salaries only started to sky rocket in the late 70’s after the reserve clause (do you even know what this was?) was killed.
Mike Smith
Well, there wasn’t any others hadn’t addressed already.
You keep saying that yet you sound like any old libertarian douchebag we’ve had here before.
PZ, I’m wrapping up my second year of a neuroscience postdoc, and have been struggling with my career recently. I’m just about to make a pretty significant change to a new postdoc. Thanks for writing this, it’s the exact thing I needed to read right now. It’s much, much too easy with all the uncertainties of the academic career path to get caught up in worrying about what you “should” be doing to succeed, what will look good on a CV, what will impress grant reviewers. Academia is hard enough; without anchoring yourself in the core of what you love about your work, it just won’t be worth it.