Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Phew!
Well, I know I haven't been keeping up with this the way I intended but
screw you I'm busy. Today I gave my presentation for my PhD annual review,
and I'm glad that its off my back. The biggest comment/complaint I got was
that my topic was too broad and that I was trying to do too much. Basically
tackling too big of a problem. After some other comments today, I had a bit
of revelation. On a side note, I wonder if a relevation is really a leap
forward in understanding as is implied or if it isn't more of a realization
of an inconsistancy and an attempt to explain the now visible
simplistically. Anyways, my relevation or realization if you may is
disconcerting. Basically what I have learned and fully realized is that to
get a PhD you must highly specialize in a topic and generally deal with a
very narrow issue. The alarming inconsistency is the idea that there are
large problems with our world today however, this idea of research basically
advocates our potentially smartest population to stick their heads in the
sand and to focus so deeply on a topic that an result that has sweeping
ramifications is a miracle - not merely because of its impact on multiple
fields but because the process is not suited to producing results with large
impacts. My thought is that an educated man is one that is well rounded and
experienced in the world but an academic man or researching man is one that
is highly specialized in a field no one else knew about. While I understand
that large problems are difficult for one person to tackle alone, I think
this mentality is detrimental. Cross-discipline research is only a small
part of the solution; I think we need to see large problems tackled by teams
and to try breaking down some of these areas of IP. Many people are worried
about not getting credit or for someone else getting acclaim based on their
work on potentially someone else's idea. What ever happened to working for
the common good? Self-sacrifing? Taking one for the team? I find the world a
very scary place lately when I see people electing a US president who by
several accounts is a grossly incompetent leader and by contrast, a small
few accounts questionably making showing minimal gains. I find it funny to
realize that in the dark ages people were lead like sheep by their religious
leaders because of their ignorance and illiteracy, yet now amonst what many
call the age of information religion is again leading people around because
of blind faith. While I enthusiastially support your beliefs, I am appalled
that you feel the need to impose your ill-educated and antiquated beliefs on
me. Perceptions rule, which is unfortunate but the tragic part is that false
or uneducated perceptions are the ones critical decisions are based.
Sorry for the slip off topic, but it will sting directly for the next for
years and its effects will ripple through out time.
Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids.
screw you I'm busy. Today I gave my presentation for my PhD annual review,
and I'm glad that its off my back. The biggest comment/complaint I got was
that my topic was too broad and that I was trying to do too much. Basically
tackling too big of a problem. After some other comments today, I had a bit
of revelation. On a side note, I wonder if a relevation is really a leap
forward in understanding as is implied or if it isn't more of a realization
of an inconsistancy and an attempt to explain the now visible
simplistically. Anyways, my relevation or realization if you may is
disconcerting. Basically what I have learned and fully realized is that to
get a PhD you must highly specialize in a topic and generally deal with a
very narrow issue. The alarming inconsistency is the idea that there are
large problems with our world today however, this idea of research basically
advocates our potentially smartest population to stick their heads in the
sand and to focus so deeply on a topic that an result that has sweeping
ramifications is a miracle - not merely because of its impact on multiple
fields but because the process is not suited to producing results with large
impacts. My thought is that an educated man is one that is well rounded and
experienced in the world but an academic man or researching man is one that
is highly specialized in a field no one else knew about. While I understand
that large problems are difficult for one person to tackle alone, I think
this mentality is detrimental. Cross-discipline research is only a small
part of the solution; I think we need to see large problems tackled by teams
and to try breaking down some of these areas of IP. Many people are worried
about not getting credit or for someone else getting acclaim based on their
work on potentially someone else's idea. What ever happened to working for
the common good? Self-sacrifing? Taking one for the team? I find the world a
very scary place lately when I see people electing a US president who by
several accounts is a grossly incompetent leader and by contrast, a small
few accounts questionably making showing minimal gains. I find it funny to
realize that in the dark ages people were lead like sheep by their religious
leaders because of their ignorance and illiteracy, yet now amonst what many
call the age of information religion is again leading people around because
of blind faith. While I enthusiastially support your beliefs, I am appalled
that you feel the need to impose your ill-educated and antiquated beliefs on
me. Perceptions rule, which is unfortunate but the tragic part is that false
or uneducated perceptions are the ones critical decisions are based.
Sorry for the slip off topic, but it will sting directly for the next for
years and its effects will ripple through out time.
Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids.
