Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet?
Quote | Reply
From the First Things website:



. . . An anonymous columnist, an assistant professor of English at a Midwestern college who calls himself “Thomas H. Benton,” has penned an unusually thoughtful essay for the December 9th issue, entitled “Reference Works and Academic Celebrity.” It is well worth the attention of FIRST THINGS readers who have access to that publication. (Link for subscribers is here.)



Benton is hardly the first person to lament the fact that contemporary academic culture has been impoverished by its capitulation to the cult of academic celebrity. But he goes further than that, taking aim at the fallacy undergirding the cult: our obsession with “individual genius.” The very idea that the Ph.D. dissertation ought to be an “original contribution to knowledge,” a precept that was already well entrenched when William James wrote against it a century ago, has helped to feed this romantic fallacy. But, as Benton shows, the fallacy has metastasized into something downright ludicrous. In a job interview for an entry-level position at a second-tier state university, Benton was asked how his scholarly work might “redraw the boundaries of the profession.” To his credit, he was unable to manufacture a glib and confident answer to such a breathtakingly stupid question, and was too modest to put himself forward as the next Derrida. And instantly, he says, “I could feel the temperature of the room drop as if I had just stepped into a meat locker.” The interview was over.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply
Re: Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
From the First Things website:



. . . An anonymous columnist, an assistant professor of English at a Midwestern college who calls himself “Thomas H. Benton,” has penned an unusually thoughtful essay for the December 9th issue, entitled “Reference Works and Academic Celebrity.” It is well worth the attention of FIRST THINGS readers who have access to that publication. (Link for subscribers is here.)



Benton is hardly the first person to lament the fact that contemporary academic culture has been impoverished by its capitulation to the cult of academic celebrity. But he goes further than that, taking aim at the fallacy undergirding the cult: our obsession with “individual genius.” The very idea that the Ph.D. dissertation ought to be an “original contribution to knowledge,” a precept that was already well entrenched when William James wrote against it a century ago, has helped to feed this romantic fallacy. But, as Benton shows, the fallacy has metastasized into something downright ludicrous. In a job interview for an entry-level position at a second-tier state university, Benton was asked how his scholarly work might “redraw the boundaries of the profession.” To his credit, he was unable to manufacture a glib and confident answer to such a breathtakingly stupid question, and was too modest to put himself forward as the next Derrida. And instantly, he says, “I could feel the temperature of the room drop as if I had just stepped into a meat locker.” The interview was over.


I don't follow the train here. Why is the idea that to earn a Ph.D. requires an original contribution to knowledge incorrect or bad ("the very idea", "precept", "well entrenched")? How does Benton get from there to a "cult of academic celebrity"? I would think that, by definition, making an original contribution to knowledge that has any value would "redraw the boundaries". If you added to the body of knowledge in a profession in a meaningful way, then someone else (or yourself) should be able to build on that new knowledge to "redraw the boundaries": "My research can be used to ...".

The author's dismissive attitude ("second-tier state university") combined with "breathtakingly stupid question" (maybe I'm more stupid, but I think it is a meaningful question) and his false dichotomy (either the answer must be glib or overly boastful; there is certainly a factual middle ground answer) doesn't speak well for the author.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sort of reminds me of the application for Duke med school that asked in so many words "what unique contribution will you make to the entering class of 2000?"

They can't honestly be looking for an honest and sincere answer.

_______________________________________________
Quote Reply
Re: Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'd just say "boundaries are for sissies" and accept the job offer.

=======================
-- Every morning brings opportunity;
Each evening offers judgement. --
Quote Reply
Re: Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Redraw the boundaries of the profession" is surely an overstatement, but requiring original thought for the lofty title of PhD is not too much to ask in my mind.
Quote Reply
Re: Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet? [vitus979] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This doesn't seem like such a bad question for such a position. The question as described was phrased in the subjunctive mood, if I remember my grammar correctly.

From the context I interpret it to mean how the future prof's research might be important to the profession. It seems like a reasonable question for that kind of position. If the planned area of research is insignificant in the field, then maybe it won't meet the requirements of the grant that funded the position.

The context of the question doesn't seem to fit the context the passage tries to imply. It doesn't sound like a what have you done to change the world lately kind of question, as the author seems to imply.

I wasn't there obviously, but that is my take.
Quote Reply
Re: Have you redrawn the boundaries of your profession yet? [AmyCO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Redraw the boundaries of the profession" is surely an overstatement

Do ya think? Here's the next passage:

In retrospect, one might have wanted Benton to respond, “If this ‘profession’ is so fragile and unstable as to have its boundaries redrawn by any freshly minted Ph.D. to come down the pike, who would want to be a part of it? And just who do you people think you are? Would interviewers for an entry-level job in, say, physics, at Mega State U. in Oshkosh ask each applicant how their work would comprehensively reorder our understanding of the physical universe?”

but requiring original thought for the lofty title of PhD is not too much to ask in my mind.

I think requiring original thought is quite a lower bar to reach than even speculation on how one's work may redraw the boundaries of a professional field. How many can claim to have done the latter? A handful of people, at most, in the history of the race. Asking a question like that before hiring an associate professor of English at some second rate (probably conservative) college is a little like asking a Miss America candidate how she intends to enact world peace if she's crowned, and expecting her to have a real answer at hand. It's stupid.

Besides which, "original" thought is overrated. Better we should have accurate thought, deep thought, thought which reflects the truth, thought which reveals reality. Mere novelty is useless. Another passage:

“I’ve been clearing out my theory shelves of so much stuff that seemed absolutely vital 10 or 15 years ago and seems almost worthless now.” Such an experience has led him to the depressing conclusion that “most academic careers are built on books that barely survive the decade in which they were written.” The ethos of high-quality reference books offers, for him, a useful contrast, one of service rather than self-promotion.

All those books that were absolutely vital a whole decade ago but are now utterly outdated were probably quite original. Too bad so many of them turn out to be quite wrong, too.








"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Quote Reply