| Women in Science |
[May. 12th, 2008|12:07 am] |
While the piece is a look at why women may or may not choose a career in science, it ends up being a much more interesting look at being a graduate student in the sciences, and why science is in many ways a suboptimal field. Link.
In fact, the writer turns the question around and asks why men bother with the sciences in the first place. His explanation? Rather amusing, but I don't think it's too far off:
Having been both a student and teacher at MIT, my personal explanation for men going into science is the following: - young men strive to achieve high status among their peer group
- men tend to lack perspective and are unable to step back and ask the question "is this peer group worth impressing?"
Going from this idea:
Consider Albert Q. Mathnerd, a math undergrad at MIT ("Course 18" we call it). He works hard and beats his chest to demonstrate that he is the best math nerd at MIT. This is important to Albert because most of his friends are math majors and the rest of his friends are in wimpier departments, impressed that Albert has even taken on such demanding classes. Albert never reflects on the fact that the guy who was the best math undergrad at MIT 20 years ago is now an entry-level public school teacher in Nebraska, having failed to get tenure at a 2nd tier university. When Albert goes to graduate school to get his PhD, his choice will have the same logical foundation as John Hinckley's attempt to impress Jodie Foster by shooting Ronald Reagan.
I must admit, I take a perverse pleasure from impressing the wrong folks (ie fellow geeks) too. In fact, the only difference between me and a bad kid who goes around jumping from moving vehicles to impress girls is that he's got a few STDs to show for his efforts.
However, going in further, he gives some wonderful career advice: Don't pick a job just based on what you love, pick it also based on the combination of money, time, and responsibility. In his example:
A friend of the author says that most medical doctors choose the wrong specialty: "They pick based on what part of the body they think is the most interesting. They should really pick based on whether or not they want to have the responsibility of running an office, having employees, and marketing themselves or whether they want a shift job and can walk away at the end of the shift." She finds some of her colleagues less than optimally happy because they chose to be plastic surgeons and don't enjoy being the boss and not being able to take eight weeks of vacation per year. On the other hand, she finds some emergency medicine doctors who, while they enjoy the freedom and flexibility to work as much or as little as they choose in any given year, would prefer to have the responsibility and prestige of running their own practice.
|
|
|
| Comments: |
This brings up a lot of food for thought. I would say that fantasies (i.e. delusions of grandeur, impressing an imaginary hypothetical person) are fundamental to having a functional life. 2 is a waste (more or less by definition, lol) but 1 is not entirely negative. the article seems to imply that it is and reprimands boys for having such an attitude (i.e. they are fools for wasting their time on something they probably enjoy doing also) all the while telling people that making megabucks and having a family (another fantasy) are all worth it. maybe someone doesn't care about having a family?
Honestly I think this comment has an attitude that I have,
Also I think this is a good comment from the link
"From Geoff B: Perhaps men have a greater buffer of time to recover from career mistakes. I actually know a couple of guys who got PhD's, then went to MBA or JD degrees - "
I think you caught something that struck me about life goals, concerning family and money. The author seems to make an error in perspective, thinking that women generally think in such a way.
I would imagine that most scientists become scientists because they have a burning curiosity about the field in which they specialize. Note that it's a rather good thing for our civilization that they do.
For probably at least 80% of the folks in those fields, I think it's true that scientists are there thinking "Ï actually get paid to do this". I know I'd still be happy making less mone (not that I'd want my job to hear that).
Of course, given the whole "Ï'm happy to be here" thing, I wonder why athletes go crazy about money...
Interesting stuff... Makes me want to write something on the subject. Especially the 'lacking in perspective' bit - definitely an Achilles heel if there ever was one. | |
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
bellisaurius's journal
