As a graduate student, I’ve received plenty of advice, much of it contradictory. I’ve been told to attend as many conferences as possible, while others have warned me to avoid them. Some suggest picking a dissertation topic I’m passionate about, while others recommend choosing one that is more marketable. I have been advised to publish only in generalist journals, while others say to focus on specialist ones. One camp tells me to pour all my energy into crafting the best dissertation, while another suggests prioritizing publications and piecing them together into a dissertation later. I have also been encouraged to invest time in teaching, only to hear from others that I should avoid it completely. Some recommend co-authoring with established scholars, while others caution against co-authorship altogether.
The issue is not just that there is too much advice to sift through. There is plenty of advice I can easily ignore. For example, I can dismiss career advice from people in jobs I would not want, financial advice from those who lack financial stability, and personal advice from people whose own lives are a mess. The real challenge lies in the fact that much of the advice I receive seems credible. Every piece of advice I mentioned came from people who hold professional positions that I would consider enviable.
Once, before a graduate seminar began, a student in a terminal Master’s program asked two professors how she should pitch her dissertation project idea. Both professors held what many would call “dream jobs” and, given the student’s career trajectory, it was not unreasonable to think she could reach a similar position. The first professor gave a detailed, three-minute plan. The second professor shook her head the entire time. When asked what her advice would be, she simply said, “I don’t know, but not that.” And then the seminar began. The student ended up with advice from one credible source telling her to do one thing, and another telling her not to do that thing. Many graduate students face this exact problem: contradictory advice from those who seem equally expert in securing academic positions.
So, what should graduate students do? We cannot pursue two incompatible paths. I do not have a complete answer, but I would suggest a starting point for thinking about the problem. One reason for the conflicting advice seems to be that the people giving it are making different assumptions about the graduate student they are advising. They might assume the student’s career goals, motivations for studying philosophy, or personal goals align with their own, or they might misjudge the student’s tolerance for risk in the job market.
An advising professor might assume the student wants a career in academia when that is not the case, or that the student would only be satisfied with a job in a philosophy department when they might be happier elsewhere. The professor might also miscalculate how much risk the student is willing to take in their job search.
My advice to graduate students is to be aware of the assumptions that those giving you advice are making about you. You may receive good advice from one professor based on one set of assumptions, and good advice from another professor based on a different set of assumptions. Being mindful of these underlying assumptions can help you decide which advice is truly useful for your own unique path.
Andrew Allison
Andrew Allison is PhD Candidate in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Calgary. His research interests are in finance ethics, political philosophy, and the philosophy of money.
this is so true. While a professor say philosophy is about exposure to lots of classes and topics as much as possible, other says philosophy isn’t about having lots of “information”. Or when one says philosophy is enjoyable most when it’s about confusing language as it is in the continental philosophy, other defends that philosophy should be very clear and understandable. Also the same professor might say that we should focus on the question what triggers us most or what we are most passionate about, the other might say start with the classic questions from Plato or Aristotle…
I recall getting some slipshod advice from supposed mentors when I was doing graduate work in the 1980s, but nothing this bad. Your points are sound, but overlook a larger issue which isn’t especially pleasant to face. The harsh truth: those you’ve sought out as mentors probably don’t care about you. If they say they do, it’s probably BS. They care about their own projects, careers, and advancement … In my experience, graduate students seeking advice were not a priority.
Keep in mind: the more graduate students a department enrolls, the better it looks on paper. Hence the perverse incentive to bring in more graduate students. The more PhDs it graduates, moreover, the better the institution looks — often for funding purposes. Nothing compels anyone on the inside to care two hoots what happens to PhDs after they graduate.
What I’d do if I was just starting out, contemplating becoming a professional philosopher, the first thing I’d do is question myself as to my own motivations and goals: why do I want this (to be a credentialed philosopher)? Answer the question in detail. Then: do I actually need a PhD to achieve that goal. Obviously, to become a professor at most institutions you’ll need the PhD, but when you have it in hand you’ll confront one of the most hostile job markets out there and employers that don’t mind using you and then throwing you out.
I’d also read this, which contains the best lengthy advice I could muster, based on a few of my own errors in this regard as well as those of others:
https://stevenyates.medium.com/so-you-want-to-get-a-phd-in-philosophy-f94058acb5eb
Then proceed with caution, if at all. While I don’t enjoy throwing cold water on anyone’s sincerely felt career aspirations, it’s the right thing to do. All graduate students in philosophy departments, and prospective graduate students, should know what they’re getting themselves into, and you won’t necessarily get it from any of your mentors who have every incentive to avoid these harsh truths.