|
|
|
|
|
|
by seanmcdirmid
4711 days ago
|
|
|
Your response definitely isn't very coherent. If that is my fault, I apologize. As an almost-academic who did his undergrad in the mid 90s, I'm not too afraid of getting out of research, though it's a nice place to be since we have so much freedom. It helps to be in a less theoretical field. The reality of academia, especially in computer science, is that the system encourages a lot of bad behavior like crap publications. It is the job of the scientist to work around this bad behavior and still try to do good...tough yes, but necessary. If you can't juggle this, then failing out is more honorable than degenerating to fit the system, which would be a quite pointless existence. |
|
|
<quote>If you can't juggle this, then failing out is more honorable than degenerating to fit the system<quote>
Science isn't what you think, or I think. Rather, it is what the community thinks to be true at any given point in time. If the community as a whole judges by quantity instead of quality, that's what most scientists will conform to. It is important to understand why this is the case. I believe the primary reason is that quality is extremely hard to judge. Most conference program committees will tell you this. You can easily spot the diamonds and the turds. How do you sort out amongst the rest?
I also disagree with your overall attitude in which you consider academics dealing with their reality to be a "pointless existence". However, you are certainly entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to disagree with it :)