Samantha Atkins wrote:
> A degree is a piece of paper. You need people with well tuned brains, a
Sure, little disagreement here.
> passion for the work and enough practical experience to avoid the
> pitfalls they and others have already experienced. I don't work for
> places or people too stupid to understand that.
If you want to do neuroscience, you might discover that *everybody*
*everywhere* is too stupid to understand that. So your choices are
suddenly reduced to: 1) looking for some other area to work in
2) getting a degree after all, dammit
3) find sponsors (who also are usually also stupid enough to look
for a degree and accomplishment track before commiting their
investments) and whip up a research center all by yourself.
People who can't walk on air or don't come from a serious money background
usually tend to choose the path of least resistance and choose 2)
> If you can read, understand and work with the concepts of a branch or
> multiple branches of learning then precisely why is it worthwhile to
> spend N years getting a degree in them? There are many, many PhD'ed
> people out there who do not deserve more consideration just for that and
> who do not receive more consideration because of it.
If you're really smart, you can score high enough in the tests to
be able to attend the best institutions of the world, and work with
leading practiticioners in the field. There's no way you can do that
on your own. The equipment and the noncommited knowledge are simply
not to be found elsewhere.
> Perhaps, in normal times. If you want to go to normal R&D jobs in
> someone else's lab or get an academic post with enough funding. But if
> you are on fire to create then I would not automatically recommend it.
> Not even to those half my age.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:49 MDT