[rthomas6]

I'm not claiming you're wrong, but why isn't it possible for the student to simply no longer place any value in getting a PhD? That is what they claim, and intelligent people often make decisions on principle that make little practical sense.

[NhanH]

It's the same reason that people don't drop everything in their life to pursue their ideals: the odd of succeeding following the established path may be awful, but the alternatives' odds are even worse. Even without regard to the practicality of the choices (ie economic aspect of it) , you basically have two choices: go to grad school and have ~25-50% of getting somethings out of it (and I'm talking about knowledge/ skills, not the degree), or lock yourself in a room, hoping for the best?

If you're on the caliber of, says Srinivasa Ramanujan or Galois, then I'm fairly sure you don't have to give a shit to PhD or any educational systems. Most of us aren't that type of geniuses though, and we do need help and coaching from advisors, grad schools or otherwise.

[betterunix]

Eh...

In theory, the PhD is this fantastic credential that opens all kinds of doors. In practice it might make a small difference in your starting salary in industry. The only place where having a PhD is truly important is in a research position, which basically means academia. Even then it is not the last word -- tenure track positions might be out, but there are a number of schools who are willing to hire a good researcher whose highest degree is an MS.

Even with a PhD your prospects may not be all that much better than they are with an MS. I have seen people get a PhD with only one or two published papers, in a field where you need at least ten to even have a serious shot at a tenure track position. If you are the kind of person whose attitude is, "Screw it, I am in school to learn as much as I can and not just to publish a bunch of incremental improvements," you might not even get a shot at an academic job. Sure, someone can pad their CV as a postdoc -- but that is not all that much better than being a grad student, just moderately better pay.

[NhanH]

I wasn't talking about PhD as a credential, I was talking about how for the normal good-but-not-Feynman aspiring scientists, going for a PhD is one of the few ways you can properly learn how to do research.

[rthomas6]

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. I certainly would not make the decision of the article writer even if I hated my entire field. But intelligent (though not wise) people often make foolhardy decisions. Perhaps what the writer did is more unthinkable than I'm imagining; I only have a bachelor's degree, but I've seen smart, motivated people switch directions at inopportune times. Someone I know left a well-paying job that fit his (4 year STEM) degree with an amazing work environment for... well he didn't know what for. He just didn't like engineering after all and wanted to do something else in some other field.

[yk]

Because there is a story why he does no longer value a PhD. And a PhD is a huge investment, both in time as in money, and you don't walk away lightly. So even assuming that the email is a comprehensive account of his reasons to quit his PhD, he did still go from believing in the university system to deeply disappointed of the university system, a system he did spend a huge amount of time in. ( And this is essentially the best case.)

[PeterisP]

If you want to do research, then you either need funding (for which you need to work with the system being criticised, get the PhD and get a grad student workforce..) or you need to be independently wealthy from some other source so you can afford to.

[miguelrochefort]

Aren't there more alternatives? I'm in that particular situation, and I don't have formal education, nor money.