From their first day in graduate school, doctoral students are aware that to earn a degree they must complete a dissertation, and they are often reminded of the importance of finding a topic of appropriate scope and depth. What they may not realize, however, is that in their search for an initial faculty position, the dissertation will be regarded as the essence of their academic identity. Thus a subject needs to suit both earning a diploma and finding a job. Yet ironically, a topic that helps to reach the first objective may in fact hinder success in achieving the second.
Consider a hypothetical student I’ll call Pat, who seeks a position in epistemology but, having become interested in John Dewey’s aesthetics, decides to write a dissertation on that subject. The faculty in Pat’s department approves the thesis with enthusiasm, yet when Pat is considered for a post in epistemology, the appointing department not surprisingly prefers a candidate whose dissertation is in the theory of knowledge, not the theory of art.
Next consider a student, Chris, who specializes in ethics and decides to write on the moral theory of Nicolai Hartmann, the German ontologist who viewed values as unchanging ideal entities. This subject may work as a dissertation topic, because few faculty members are likely to be familiar with the details of Hartmann’s position and may see the area as worth exploring. But when Chris seeks positions in ethics, most other applicants will have written dissertations devoted to subjects far more likely to be viewed as useful in teaching standard undergraduate ethics courses. After all, which applicant would be more appealing: one who focuses on Kant, utilitarianism, contractualism, or virtue theory, or, instead, one who specializes in Hartmann?
A third student, Sandy, wishes to be distinctive by choosing a topic that is outré, for example, supporting the morality of severe corporal punishment in order to reduce crime. Perhaps a couple of faculty members in Sandy’s department judge the topic as bold, though odd, and pass the thesis. At interviews, however, when asked to explain the work, Sandy faces a skeptical audience, uncomfortable appointing a faculty member who holds such a strange view. In short, most interviewers seek candidates with topics that are innovative, not idiosyncratic.
A fourth student, Leslie, has two major research interests: the history of modern philosophy from Descartes to Kant and the history of Russian philosophy. The former is taught in virtually every department, whereas the latter is offered in hardly any; hence many positions call for a specialization in modern philosophy, while virtually none seeks expertise in Russian philosophy. Thus even if Leslie’s doctoral faculty includes a specialist in Russian philosophy who encourages students to make that area the focus of their dissertations, Leslie would be well advised to resist such urgings and choose instead a topic in the history of modern philosophy.
Notice, however, that such decisions require awareness of which fields of philosophy are most in demand. PhilJobs: Jobs For Philosophers provides such information. Granted, the number of openings in any particular area will vary from year to year, but departments need to provide coverage for the courses they offer, and curricula rarely change dramatically. That obvious consideration may be overlooked as graduate students follow the lead of professors who have research agendas of their own. The impracticality of some of their suggestions, however, may become painfully apparent when candidates are called on to explain how their work has prepared them to teach courses regularly offered to undergraduates.
A job search is arduous enough without identifying yourself with a dissertation topic that either misrepresents your major focus or does not align with customary materials in the usual courses offered by most departments. Granted, students are entitled to pursue an independent path of inquiry that does not conform to common expectations. Nevertheless in doing so they are likely to face a special challenge in finding a position, and they should be alerted to this situation by responsible members of their doctoral faculty.
Steven M. Cahn
Steven M. Cahn is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. The most recent books he has authored are Religion Within Reason (Columbia University Press, 2017); Teaching Philosophy: A Guide (Routledge, 2018); Inside Academia: Professors, Politics, and Policies (Rutgers University Press, 2019); The Road Traveled and Other Essays (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2019); Philosophical Adventures (Broadview Press, 2019); A Philosopher’s Journey: Essays from Six Decades (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2020), and Navigating Academic Life (Routledge, 2021).
