Summary: YOUR Ph.D. means almost next to nothing, but collectively they expand the bounds of human knowledge.
I know a guy with a PhD in medieval agriculture with a specific focus on cows. He’s one of my brothers wife’s friends.
This guy devoted his life to ye olde english cow farts.
He’s struggling for employment as one might expect.
whereas I , with my bachelors degree in clowning, have been head hunted for my last two corporate jobs.
Who even funds degrees like that?
You end up with fewer job prospects than a GED
A PhD is not the only way to expand human knowledge. This is disregarding a lot of work done by a lot of hard working people.
As their specialised knowledge reaches the edge of the circle, their general knowledge updating should retract.
Everyone has met a PhD that is almost entirely clueless in other areas. Not their fault though, don’t get me wrong.
Edit: The person that downvoted must be Dr. Climate Change Denier. Dr. Covid Denier has joined the fray.
It’s funny but you see the same thing in sports, or I see it specifically in hockey. Phenom kid gets drafted and at 18 has the social skills of the hockey puck he’s playing with. By the time he’s 36 he’s not the player he once was but is a more well rounded individual with age and experience. When you focus all your energy to become the best at something, like a PhD, athlete, musician, whatever, you sacrifice some things along the way for sure.
Presumably you could meet the boundary with “a dollah fifty in late fees at the public library” and find a way to push through from there. You’d have to find a way to publish or share your new knowledge. Studying at uni gives you access to experts in their own thing that likely have knowledge that could help you with your thing as well as a system designed to churn out these papers when you eventually find your thing.
Every day people discover new things but it takes attention, effort, and will to PROVE it’s a new thing and more yet to share that with the world. Too bad you can’t get an honorary PhD for doing that, at least not reliably.
Like the guy who found this somehow important new shape not to long ago? I don’t think he has a PhD. But he did contribute. Not saying that it’s easy though.
I have no idea what you’re talking about, but I expected someone to bring up some shit like that. My point still stands.
Yes but how will I feel good that I spent 140k on a piece of paper if I don’t brag about it?
I’ve been making six figures while getting my PhD. There are plenty of opportunities to get your PhD funded if you are a US citizen. There are plenty more valid places to poke fun at pursuing a PhD but it is very common to have funding and thus no debt.
The ratio is off. You learn a lot more from high school and bachelor’s degree and you learn way less with your master. PhD is just expanding a little bit more on master.
The visual is more about highlighting specialization and its distance from the limit of human knowledge. You often can’t represent every aspect of a complex subject at the same time on a single visual. Kinda like how you can’t represent the solar system distances and planet sizes to scale on a single page, you have to pick one.
Common knowledge would be more appropriate. It is known by many people, but it is not basic as in obvious. It took a long time to know what we learn in a very “basic” high school biology course.
And if you actually remember half of what you learned in that course a decade later, people ask things like, “where do you learn this shit?”
I kind of hate this image. Its like a way to discredit all the learning done in the formative elementary/high school years. If I would guess, 60-70% of everything I have learned was in high school and thats with me having several published papers.
To be fair, most of “all human knowledge” is stuff like when the last time was that each person on the planet pooped.
Nobody knows when I pooped last. It was some time today, but I don’t remember when, and no one else ever knew.
