U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education > Colleges and Universities
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-11-2010, 05:19 AM
 
19,056 posts, read 24,897,459 times
Reputation: 13484

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
I'm not sure what you mean by "bubble itself", the point is that cognitive biases (in particular the bandwagon effect) are always in play and private industry does not deal with them as well as academia does. This does not mean every piece of research coming out of private industry is tainted, just that its more likely to be tainted than research coming out of academia.
Again, I have no reason to buy into this. I'll leave room for it being the case, but all you have provided is loose assertions to herd effect. It's not making a good argument and it contradicts my experience.

Quote:
Anyhow, I've never spoken about a sensei and if you are not aware of the influence of those above you then you aren't paying attention.
This conversation is getting pretty funny. Your bobbing and weaving. Your argument rest on how things should ideally be in academia, loose correlations with psychological phenomena, and projections to environments you can only assume about. It all falls short because this thread is addressing offline, out of your mind, reality.

Quote:
What relevance does this have to the issue (the issue being discussed, not the thread title)? Yes being a grad student is in some respects like working for a private company, but people don't remain grad students all their life. The vast majority of research in academia is published by professors, not graduate students.
Well, I'm staying within the context of my intent for this thread. That is the point of it. That is why it matters to me. You want to flip off to la la land, which if fine, but it's really not helping me come to any conclusions. Unless you're saying that I should go for the prized gig.

Quote:
And just in case you were not aware we have been discussing a tangent that came up earlier in the thread. Namely whether research in private industry is less credible than research in academia. If you wanted to keep the thread on the primary topic then I'd suggest not going back and forward on a side issue with me and others. I was merely commenting on a tangent that already existed.
The charge has application to the dilemma of the OP. It was noted as a reason why I should not bother. What would be meaningful would be to address the research. If you or the other poster do not realize that the subject matter of researching awarding PhDs is no more interesting, credible, viable, accepted by peer-reviewed journals, etc as research being published in industry, then actual research should be addressed. That is what matters here. I have little doubt that you know full well that we both can find a litany of comparable projects.

Quote:
Good thing I never made that suggestion huh? But a company will have trouble patenting something if they published the key IP before the patent was applied for. Furthermore, patents themselves create a closed system. Even if you know how XYZ is done, you can't do it yourself because there is a patent.
I also find it odd that you think a drug coming to market results in one published paper. That's just weird from my pov.

Quote:
Nothing is produced "regardless intent", intent always plays a role in any development. Again, this is all well documented in psychology. There is a strong intent-behavior link...
The last defense I attended was a for a friend in school. His work was interesting. I don't have total recall, but he developed some micro array tool. His adviser indeed wanted the patent. He wanted the PhD. They got two birds with one stone. The publication is out there. That may not fit with your ideas of how things should be, but that's how it went.

Quote:
You keep making claims about human behavior, but none of them are founded in reality.
I have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote:
This is of course not the point, if you just happen to be working on something you'd want to work on regardless then great. But this does not change the fact that you don't have the ability to work on whatever you'd like. A academic as the freedom to move from one sub-field to another without much problem someone in private industry rarely has this freedom.

I'm not sure why you want to deny all the things that make academia different than private industry.
I'm not denying all things that differentiate the two. There have been some erroneous claims. I have countered them. I have also agreed that academia and gov. are the places for pure research. If you were to read some other comments I've made on this forum and else where you would find that my position is that I fully recognize this. I have clearly stated that pharma is not to be relied upon to cure and tackle disease. Yes, they will play a role. But, pharma would assume close or see folk six feet under before doing anything if profit was not coming in. Politically, I believe that a much larger portion of our taxes should be funneled to the gov to address 5 or 6 of the leading conditions that plague our country (heart disease, diabetes, cancers, etc). So, I'm not delusional here. This does not change the fact that the research coming out of industry is not largely generic in nature. That's why it can be published as we go. Any of the projects I work on could be transferred to an academic lab to be used for obtaining a degree.

Quote:
I realize that "at your level" you are not ware of what is going on with the company, but that is just the point. You don't even know the underlying business goals how possibly could you know to what degree they effect what you are doing?!? You keep claiming how much insight you have because you work in a private industry, but the reality is that you're just a cog and you know almost nothing about how the machine as a whole operates (and just to note, this is not necessarily a bad thing). "Early discovery" is just one node (that you are just one piece of) in the overall structure, obviously what you do is connected to numerous other nodes. Most importantly not only is there information flowing out of your node, but there is significant information flowing into your node from upper management, etc. On the other hand research in academia does not really have child nodes, there is nobody pulling the strings and the research is largely self-directed.
It may be self-directed, but that doesn't make it any more interesting, revolutionary etc in all circumstances. I'm saying this because I have participated in projects and attended defences where the work is largely irrelevant. Yes, I understand it does not have to be this way. But, it does not take a way the fact that it happens.

Quote:
Now if only you'd take your own advice. You continually think you are some sort of sage because you are a mid-level researcher at some large private company.
That's such baloney. You think a difference in opinion is a kin to sage thinking. Come on now. You want to convince me of something, then do a better job of it. If the research is not credible, then go find some research and show me.

Quote:
The issues I'm discussing are mathematical and psychological in nature as a result your personal experience is not only irrelevant, but you are making a huge logical mistake by focusing on it. If I was telling you how you should perform your particular research I would be out of my element, but talking about organizational structures and dynamical systems is very much my element. Luckily I'm talking about the latter, but you want to pretend as if I'm talking about the former.
Because it's what I'm talking about. If the work I'm doing now cannot be applied to a degree, I want to know why specifically based on the merits of the work itself. If the work itself coming out of industry is not credible, then why do I find it cited in sci-finder by publications coming out of uni? That's where I'm coming from.

Quote:
With regard to the issue of research in academia vs private industry the key issues are the emergent properties of the general policies and organizational structure of the respective research environments. Looking at a single variable in either case is going to tell you nothing due to the non-linearity in these systems. But you seem to have no idea what any of this means, so its a bit pointless to go on about it. As stated, if you already think you know everything, there's little to add.
How original. Any way, to bring up my colleague at work. He is just about finished with his PhD. He might already be done by now. The work was a collaboration between the school and the co. Obviously, the assertions being made in this thread haven't played a role in his situation. Both advisers obviously came to an agreement. I don't see why this cannot be taken one step further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-13-2010, 12:43 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,469 posts, read 19,726,489 times
Reputation: 4355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Again, I have no reason to buy into this. I'll leave room for it being the case, but all you have provided is loose assertions to herd effect. It's not making a good argument and it contradicts my experience.
There is nothing "loose" about my assertions, though I have not made any effort to actually demonstrate the validity of the cognitive biases I've mentioned. I certainly have no desire to demonstrated that well established psychology is indeed true. Or perhaps the issue is that you don't think what applies every where else applies to your research group.....

Still don't get why your personal experience is irrelevant? That is surprising concerning you're involved in research and have at least to some degree studied psychology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
The charge has application to the dilemma of the OP.
Okay, so I guess its useful after all. I'd just repeat what the other poster said, namely that if you really think what is being stated is hogwash go try to do it. And just to be clear, I don't agree with everything that the other posted stated. In particular I think his/her statements were too strong, on the other hand your view of matters is on the other side of the spectrum.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
I also find it odd that you think a drug coming to market results in one published paper. That's just weird from my pov.
I find it odd that you keep suggesting I think things that I don't in fact think. I guess its easier just to focus on the straw man at this point?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
I have also agreed that academia and gov. are the places for pure research.....
Yes I know you've agreed with this, but you don't seem to get the implications of it. Academics tend to value pure research more than the sort of applied research you have in mind. Academics are likely to think what you do is pedestrian. Now some professors (usually at lower ranking universities) are not really capable of anything greater than this, as a result it is here where you're most likely to get what you mentioned in the OP to work.

You did not really say (at least in the OP) what sort of degree program you had in mind. In the case of chemistry I'd imagine it would be more workable as its much more engineering like (i.e, more application oriented) than the core sciences. Anybody that is interested in theory, would likely study physics.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
It may be self-directed, but that doesn't make it any more interesting, revolutionary etc in all circumstances.
The point is not that the work is always more interesting, etc rather that it creates a difficult research environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
If the work itself coming out of industry is not credible, then why do I find it cited in sci-finder by publications coming out of uni? That's where I'm coming from.
You seem to have created a straw man. Its not that ALL research coming out of industry lacks credibility. Rather its that research coming out private industry is more easily corrupted as a result it does not have the same level of credibility as purely academic work.

The situation is obviously nuanced as well. Not all individuals or firms are created equally.


Regardless, in regards to the OP its not that I think what you are talking about is impossible. Rather I think if you were able to do this you'd end up with a rather mundane Ph.d. Personally, I don't get the point of getting a mere shell of a ph.d. I think this is essentially what the other poster said as well. If I was going to get a ph.d in something I'd want to work with people that were brilliant and working on truly interesting issues. You seem to believe that its pointless to really pursue a ph.d if you're not going to go into academia. I don't understand that at all, the point of a ph.d is not to get a job in academia. Its to learn. I have trouble seeing how you are going to solve interesting and open ended research problems with the attitude you have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2010, 05:08 AM
 
19,056 posts, read 24,897,459 times
Reputation: 13484
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Okay, so I guess its useful after all. I'd just repeat what the other poster said, namely that if you really think what is being stated is hogwash go try to do it. And just to be clear, I don't agree with everything that the other posted stated. In particular I think his/her statements were too strong, on the other hand your view of matters is on the other side of the spectrum.
First, I'm not saying it's all hogwash. If I didn't want alternative perspectives I wouldn't be here. Why charge extremes while dealing out extremes? Any way, I may try at some point. I'm not ready. At this point I'm mulling it over. I need to talk about it. You and the rest of the posters in this thread have been helping with that. It would be great to find someone who has done similar, but an education board would probably be a better place to go. That, and to track down that lab head my buddy told me about.

Quote:
Yes I know you've agreed with this, but you don't seem to get the implications of it. Academics tend to value pure research more than the sort of applied research you have in mind. Academics are likely to think what you do is pedestrian. Now some professors (usually at lower ranking universities) are not really capable of anything greater than this, as a result it is here where you're most likely to get what you mentioned in the OP to work.

You did not really say (at least in the OP) what sort of degree program you had in mind. In the case of chemistry I'd imagine it would be more workable as its much more engineering like (i.e, more application oriented) than the core sciences. Anybody that is interested in theory, would likely study physics.
Yes, you are correct. Given the context of the OP, I'm thinking about biomedical engineering or maybe pharmaceuticals. I would look at lower ranking uni's as well.

Quote:
You seem to have created a straw man.
I don't see how that's the case when it's an aspect of the OP. I'm not coming to some unrelated thread and injecting my stuff here.

Quote:
Its not that ALL research coming out of industry lacks credibility. Rather its that research coming out private industry is more easily corrupted as a result it does not have the same level of credibility as purely academic work.
I still haven't been convinced of that by any stretch.

Quote:
Regardless, in regards to the OP its not that I think what you are talking about is impossible. Rather I think if you were able to do this you'd end up with a rather mundane Ph.d. Personally, I don't get the point of getting a mere shell of a ph.d. I think this is essentially what the other poster said as well. If I was going to get a ph.d in something I'd want to work with people that were brilliant and working on truly interesting issues. You seem to believe that its pointless to really pursue a ph.d if you're not going to go into academia. I don't understand that at all, the point of a ph.d is not to get a job in academia. Its to learn. I have trouble seeing how you are going to solve interesting and open ended research problems with the attitude you have.
Well, I believe that's a matter of opinion. One man's garbage is another man's gold. I've had friends giddy over their doctoral work at tier II or III joe blow uni and other friends that wanted to hang themselves at Harvard if they had to spend one more day in the lab.

I believe I have good ideas. I've worked in four rather unrelated labs (imo) thus far and I've been able to find excitement in all of them. So, as long as I'm allowed some freedom to contribute my perspective and have my pov considered, I'd be fine.

Another thing I'm considering is going to a couple of uni's I'm interested in, getting to know some of the prof's and having discussions. I know there will be some course work to be done, so I wonder if I could start taking needed course work now, once I figure what program I'd like to enter, and apply later. Granted, this is risky and I don't know if I could take classes as a non-matriculated student. If I do have to leave industry for a spell, I'd like to limit the time as much as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2010, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Eastern Washington
16,907 posts, read 55,699,945 times
Reputation: 17969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Hi Mitch,


I wouldn't and couldn't do anything that involved a compound developed at my company (that isn't commercially available). I would do something generic. For example as a shot in the dark using phospholipidosis (PLD) since I've brought it up in this thread- PLD is a side effect of certain kinds of molecules that result in lipid accumulation in cells. Molecules that tend to induce PLD are typically cationic amphipillic molecues. What this means is that they have certain chemical properties that when introduced to a cellular membrane they can bond and promote fat formation that the cell cannot deal with. This can be target (organ/site) specific. So, a person can address this topic, while focussing on a particular target, without noting a specific cationic amphillic drug (CAD). It doesn't matter what the drug is, and there are many of them (antibiotics, anti-drepressants, etc), what matters is the chemical properties. Or, perhaps genetics are involved. Maybe diet. Maybe drug-drug interaction. Who knows. There are lots of areas to investigate.

This is where I think some posters get confused.


I'm sorry, I'm drinking some wine right now. What's COI again?
COI = Conflict Of Interest. There are all sorts of ways to deal with real or perceived COI issues, workarounds like for example making objective measurements for a customer but not making any analysis, judgments, or conclusions (real world example) that might be COI with a government entity.

I figured you knew of course you would be working with something generic, I just typed that up as part of the general discussion.

Anyway I hope you figure out a way to do this, I would like to figure a way to get MS or PhD while working full time or nearly full time but right now the time squeeze is too intense to try it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2010, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,469 posts, read 19,726,489 times
Reputation: 4355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Yes, you are correct. Given the context of the OP, I'm thinking about biomedical engineering or maybe pharmaceuticals. I would look at lower ranking uni's as well.
Okay, but you mentioned a desire to work on particular diseases (e.g., Crohn's disease) and that path really does not seem aligned with that desire. A cure to Crohn's is likely to come from research in immunology, not biomedical engineering. The latter is mostly applicable when the core science is well understood, which is not the case here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
I still haven't been convinced of that by any stretch.
My intent has not been to convince you, I don't care if you think something wrong. Rather, I was trying to elaborate on the matter as you did not seem to be framing it in the appropriate way (you still aren't...so I give up). I can't in principle convince you if all you see are trees.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Well, I believe that's a matter of opinion. One man's garbage is another man's gold. I've had friends giddy over their doctoral work at tier II or III joe blow...
How giddy one is about a program is completely independent of the educational merits of the program. Educational equality is not just a matter of opinion.

Doing doctoral work at a tier II or III university is largely pointless, it at best only has financial rewards. But if all you want is the degree and some financial rewards than it can make sense, if you actually want to accomplish something important it does not.

Anyhow, I'm more or less thinking of quality institutions and my comments are oriented around that perspective. Lower ranking universities do all sorts of weird things and I find their degree programs of dubious (educational) value to began with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education > Colleges and Universities
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top