Serious ambivalence about dissertation, academia

[treehugger1]

More and more frequently, I find myself no longer interested in "talking the talk" and "walking the walk." I just want to write creatively, intelligently, honestly, and for God's sake, coherently, about my dissertation topic. There are many issues, but chief among them are these:


1) I no longer believe some of the foundational assumptions of my field (in the humanities). One (of many) examples: Emotions are “socially constructed?” Oh, give me a break! How about the findings of neurobiology? Or evolutionary psychology? I am just so sick of bringing up these topics at conferences, only to be stared at, as if I were spouting nonsense.

2) I have a hard time getting myself to believe my own arguments. Even the work that I used to think was terrific (and was rewarded with prestigious fellowships and the like) I now just see as jargon-laced mumbo jumbo.

3) Worse yet, I feel the same way about almost everyone else’s research. There is just so much that is rhetorically smooth, but ideologically blinkered … or just plain bad. There are precious few scholars/critics/theorists whose work I truly admire.


Today, (and increasingly often) I don’t want to continue the diss, and, yet, am afraid to quit.

I suppose I don’t really have a clear question and, of course, have to make my own decisions in the end. But has anyone else felt the same way and, somehow, successfully moved beyond this kind of impasse? Or did you just quit?

[sciencephd]

Maybe you can bring the findings of neurobiology to the humanities.  If nobody else is doing this, it could make you the next hot thing.

[jackalope]

I would bet most of us have had some degree of these feelings. That is why the world is littered with terminal ABDs.

How close are you to finishing? I would give myself a year and pound that sucker out of is better to walk away from academia with a degree than without one.

[svenc]

I'm in a very different field, but I'll let loose with some suggestions anyway:  Give voice to all of your misgivings, heterodox interpretations, and counterarguments ... in a separate chapter at the end of your dissertation.  When you can't stand to "talk the talk" any longer, bang out a few pages for the discussion chapter.  But leave it out of the other chapters, and keep the arguments in there clean and consistent.

Not only can this be a useful coping mechanism to help you get through the writing, but it turns a weakness ("I don't believe any of this crap but I feel compelled to write it anyway") into a strength ("I am capable of thinking critically about the assumptions underlying my arguments and my field.")  And as sciencephd suggests, your discomfort with some of the tenets of your discipline and work can be the basis for your future research agenda.

[onestep]

I've been there too.  I lost a whole year during my dissertation endlessly pondering, "what is truth?"  After a while, it all went away and I completed the darn dissertation and have been happy with my career since. 

It's helpful to distinguish between jargon that's useful for communication versus jargon developed simply to help someone get famous.  I think the latter has upped the B.S. quotient in academia and contributes to the public's disdain.  Unfortunately, jargon is an occupational hazard.

[bread_pirate_naan]

On the fora you seem pretty consistent in your ambivalence about and/or hostile to academia.  Emotions are absolutely socially constructed.  It's not one or the other, nature or culture. See also, guilt.

Good luck with your decision.  It is easier to get out than in, so you should probably finish the diss.

[treehugger1]

How close are you to finishing? I would give myself a year and pound that sucker out of is better to walk away from academia with a degree than without one.

Well, I've been 3 months away for 3+ years. Not that I haven't been working my tail off. It's just that the finish line keeps receding. One of the reasons I'm so frustrated, I suppose.

I'm thinking about giving myself a firm deadline - say 6 more months -- and just throwing in the towel after that.

It's not one or the other, nature or culture. See also, guilt.

Yes. I agree, they are both. But, in my field, the 'nature' part (and the somewhat limited, but very important, universalism it implies) is frequently rejected out of hand.

[bread_pirate_naan]

Yes. I agree, they are both. But, in my field, the 'nature' part (and the somewhat limited, but very important, universalism it implies) is frequently rejected out of hand.

Perhaps you have an ethical obligation to buck the system and make welcome new perspectives.  This requires some originality, genius, diplomacy and maybe even charm.  But first, you must finish your diss.  Just jump the hoop already. 

This will be a slow month.   Revise, edit and get ready to steam ahead in mid-February. (this advice is not rationally derived)

[helpful]

Emotions are absolutely socially constructed.  It's not one or the other, nature or culture. See also, guilt.

Well, there is a third option. I can't say what that third option as it might 'out' me here, but why does there always have to be only two options?

[treehugger1]

Emotions are absolutely socially constructed.  It's not one or the other, nature or culture. See also, guilt.

Well, there is a third option. I can't say what that third option as it might 'out' me here, but why does there always have to be only two options?

Because over here in the humanities we're all about oppositions(even when we say we aren't)! It's just such a handy way of structuring arguments and <snarky comment about academia suppressed>

[dr_strangelove]

treehugger1, I sympathize. I went through something similar. I'll repeat the advice I got at the time:

Your thesis doesn't define you as a person or an academic. It's just one piece of work that you'll do over the course of your career. It'll never be perfect. Just do whatever it takes to finish it and move on to whatever your next career step is.

[prytania3]

Maybe you can bring the findings of neurobiology to the humanities.  If nobody else is doing this, it could make you the next hot thing.

I agree with Sciencephd.

I'm also sick to death of everything being a social construction. Not that social constructions don't exist, but I don't think absolutely everything is one. There are many emotions I do not believe are social construction. Like love, for example. Romance, otoh, is. I find it very annoying in the humanities, and don't even get me started on the social sciences (I give some latitude to economics).  But...

treehugger1, I sympathize. I went through something similar. I'll repeat the advice I got at the time:

Your thesis doesn't define you as a person or an academic. It's just one piece of work that you'll do over the course of your career. It'll never be perfect. Just do whatever it takes to finish it and move on to whatever your next career step is.

I also think for now, Dr. Strangelove is probably right. Just bite the bullet and finish the thing. So what if you don't believe it? Really, you will have a whole career to refute yourself.

[bread_pirate_naan]

Emotions are absolutely socially constructed.  It's not one or the other, nature or culture. See also, guilt.

Well, there is a third option. I can't say what that third option as it might 'out' me here, but why does there always have to be only two options?

Blame the two party political system?  Hegel?  etc...

My work doesn't deal with polarities exclusively, but people like them a lot.  They account for difference without complexity.  Complexity is bad and people who are comfortable with it must be stopped.  Even mere triangulation causes such a ruckus as to have an entirely negative connotation, unless you are trying to build or mediate something stable, rather than destabilize situations.

I hope they don't come after you.

[prephd]

I'm in a very different field, but I'll let loose with some suggestions anyway:  Give voice to all of your misgivings, heterodox interpretations, and counterarguments ... in a separate chapter at the end of your dissertation.  When you can't stand to "talk the talk" any longer, bang out a few pages for the discussion chapter.  But leave it out of the other chapters, and keep the arguments in there clean and consistent.

Not only can this be a useful coping mechanism to help you get through the writing, but it turns a weakness ("I don't believe any of this crap but I feel compelled to write it anyway") into a strength ("I am capable of thinking critically about the assumptions underlying my arguments and my field.")  And as sciencephd suggests, your discomfort with some of the tenets of your discipline and work can be the basis for your future research agenda.

That is excellent advice, SvenC. I am copying and pasting right now (only for my own personal use, of course).

I am sure that lots of people have just quit (which is why the graduation rate for doc. students is only somewhere around 50%).

I've been struggling with the lure of mediocrity myself lately. Mostly just because all around me I see people who seem perfectly content just to live their lives without feeling the need to do, accomplish, strive, learn, conquer, grow. Just living.

Then I decide I'm going to finish no matter what.

[pedanterast]

"Well, I've been 3 months away for 3+ years. "

What a joke.  You would not be an asset to academe regardless so why don't you just pick up your jacks and go home?  You're wasting valuable funding that could be used for people who are actually committed.  You're an energy thief who is sucking aimlessly at the public tit with no regard for the taxpayers who are your source of funding.  This is a complete disgrace.