People With Lots of Academic Qualifications

brianthebard

Wudyaquit wrote: »

Untrue. I responded to the ridiculous assertion that research is never pointless with an equally ridiculous topic.

I've then linked to a list of real examples.
"The First Case of Homosexual Necrophilia in the Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (Aves: Anatidae)", Deinsea: Annual of the Natural History Museum Rotterdam, 2001.
Rats can’t always tell the difference between Japanese spoken backwards and Dutch spoken backwards, winner, Linguistics, 2007
"Effects of Backward Speech and Speaker Variability in Language Discrimination by Rats," Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, vol. 31, no. 1, January 2005


You can blindly assert that under no circumstance is any research ever pointless but that's your point of view, not a fact.

No I didn't, you were replying to someone else on that topic.

My argument descended to your level only when you tried to insinuate that my using the internet was depriving someone else of doing so in the same way as there's limited educational resources available for people to attend 3rd level.

My level? You're the one who's made the elitist decision about what sort of research is worthwhile and what is not. You don't even seem to be able to recognise different people or arguments so intent are you with creating a silly strawman argument and pushing it to the hilt.

rantyface

Fishie wrote: »

In fairness to the OP, there are some people who seem to use academic qualifications as a way to put off entering the real world...

I know plenty of people who work in sh!tty jobs for the same reason. Straight out of school, dead-end job in airport, live with parents until mid/late twenties despite having a good income, meanwhile drinking in the pub three times a week and buying lots of clothes and cds- think they're living the dream. We sometimes call it the "Malahide disease", but I'm sure it's common elsewhere.

Ugh!

cgc5483

El Siglo wrote: »

I can think of one or two people like this...:rolleyes: One chap I came across in my undergrad is doing a research masters, oh I mean the pretentiousness and arrogance is astounding! He claims to run courses etc... and even the arrangement of his desk in the study room is like something from "The Office" (he has two desks and faces the other postgrads).
Any lecturers I've come across only put down their two most relevant qualifications (if that), it's either their undergrad and PhD (if they've no masters) or masters and PhD, just the two anyway.

The proper ethique when one has a PhD would be just to write PhD without any other titles before if the degrees are in the same field i.e BSc, Msc, PhD should just be just written PhD.

Davidius

So we should all become mathematicians? I approve.

PK2008

Davidius wrote: »

So we should all become mathematicians? I approve.

+1

El Siglo

cgc5483 wrote: »

The proper ethique when one has a PhD would be just to write PhD without any other titles before if the degrees are in the same field i.e BSc, Msc, PhD should just be just written PhD.

Well I'm just going by what I've come across, I didn't say it was proper etiquette.

Wudyaquit

brianthebard wrote: »

No I didn't, you were replying to someone else on that topic.

My level? You're the one who's made the elitist decision about what sort of research is worthwhile and what is not. You don't even seem to be able to recognise different people or arguments so intent are you with creating a silly strawman argument and pushing it to the hilt.

Perhaps it's elitist. And you make assumptions on people reading the sun based on 2 posts... Pot?

As regards a strawman argument - my point was that flitting between different courses was a waste of resources, which I stand over. From that the research aspect was picked up by others on here and I've responded.
You on the other hand resort to anything other than the issue in your posts, making no reference to your opinions on the topic. Kettle?

rantyface

Many useful scientific findings came from research that wasn't aiming to be useful and was just interesting to nerds. Lasers are the classic example, but there are many in physics and chemistry that I know of.

I'm starting a chemisty PhD soon. I don't understand why so many science-types here can't see the value of the humanities. Philosophy, history, languages... are so important. Art makes life more pleasant. I study what I enjoy not what I think may be useful. Anyone who's done any research knows how unlikely it is to be of any use, whether in science or the arts.

El Siglo

rantyface wrote: »

Many useful scientific findings came from research that wasn't aiming to be useful and was just interesting to nerds. Lasers are the classic example, but there are many in physics and chemistry that I know of.

I'm starting a chemisty PhD soon. I don't understand why so many science-types here can't see the value of the humanities. Philosophy, history, languages... are so important. Art makes life more pleasant. I study what I enjoy not what I think may be useful. Anyone who's done any research knows how unlikely it is to be of any use, whether in science or the arts.

Spot on!