# 229: Overacademization and Ph.D. Titles
Story behind the Passage
Today in the morning, I received breaking news on my cell phone that went: “Minister for Family Affirs resigns from office.” This is not the first time that this happens to a leading politician. We have been seeing many cases of this in the past years. Whenever something like this happens, I first think: Oh, Gosh, what if I did anything wrong and people find out that all was a fake? In my case, that probably is impostor syndrome. At least, I am pretty sure that I did not copy any material without declaring it. But who knows? Maybe some of the people that were accused of this also did not intend to break or bend the rules?
In her case, however, she herself drew the consequences before the public pressure became too intense. For sure, politicians base their careers on credibility and someone who obtains a Ph.D. title by fraud is not credible anymore. That is for sure. That is not even the reason why I am repeatedly interested in the topic. The reason why this is interesting to me is the question why people do it. As you know, I do not believe in the essentially bad or corrupt or evil or narcissistic person. But I believe in the fact that we are all weak in one way or the other. We are weak in the sense that we are susceptible to social conditioning and pressure. And, as I am arguing, especially in a country such as Germany with its prestigious education tradition, there is a lot of pressure on people to prove that their brains are working well. And a Ph.D. title is the emblem of this.
So, there are good reasons why one would give a lot for that. But this does not only apply to Ph.D. theses, of course. The same applies to academic studies at large. You are nothing without an academic degree, society seems to be tacitly yelling at people. I know that people from the startup scene and in many companies see thtat differently and they actively want to disrupt the German academic culture by not giving a shit about official academic degrees. But to be honest, that is an antidote that I dislike just as much because it reflects the other extreme. Academic education has its place and value and cannot just be replaced with any kind of “learn it yourself online” content. Still, academia is not for everyone. And this is again where the issue of social reputation comes in: The fact that university studies are not for everyone does not mean that “everyone” is stupid — not at all. It is simply that certain jobs do not require an academic education.
The real problem is: We do not even know what “academic” actually means anymore — this is the real mystery.
Academia etymologically derived from the gardens where Plato supposedly taught in Greece (academia | Search Online Etymology Dictionary (etymonline.com)). Recently, and, as you will see below, also ages ago, academia started becoming overacademic. This is the trend that many people have been describing — the fact that you can only become a hairdresser at least with a Bachelor’s degree. I usually call this the inflation of academic degrees. Whatever you call it — it underlines that the value of academic education suffers in one way or the other. But, again, I am not blaming the people, I am not blaming (soon to be ex-) minister Giffey in this case. I just want to raise awareness for this social phenomenon. Giffey, for example, has one child and if what I find online is correct, her son was born exactly around the time when she handed in her dissertation. It is not that easy to finish a Ph.D., work, and have a child at the samt time. This is no excuse, to make this clear again. But it shows how hard people try to achieve this goal of becoming a “Dr.” in order to move ahead in their career and/or become more respected — not only but also women.
My Learnings
“Most undergraduates in the fifties and early sixties appear to have reveled in the heady mix of high status and intellectual vitality available to them.” I am not starting with this sentence because of the fact that it mentions the situation in the sixties — more than half a decade ago! I want to simply emphasize this seeming opposition between “status” and “intellectual vitality.” To be honest, it is not an opposition if you are sincerely into learning and scholarship. But as soon as status, ego, and social fame enter the scene — everything else becomes distorted. Again, I am not saying this because I blame the people. Especially if you come from a non-academic background, social recognition is a big issue. Nobody can tell me that you are not at least tempted to factor in the outer perspective; the one that makes you become part of a different kind of “social class,” the one that has a Dr. in front of the name. This marks you as an intellectual, the people that make money and can afford to live in their own homes — people think.
It takes a while to figure out that education level and money actually have nothing to do with each other — but that is a different story…
“A Crimson editorial in 1958 attacked overacademization in the College: too much emphasis on grades, too much stress on preparation for academic careers.” Overacademization is the concept that is just as relevant today as it was many decades ago. Everything I described above about the inflation of academic degrees fits into this. But the fact that people try to buy or find certain shortcuts to get Ph.D. titles is also part of the picture. There is a considerable gap between what people think a person with a Ph.D. can do and the stuff the person actually learns to do. To make one thing very clear: The major dividing line is not between being an expert on a particular topic and being a layperson. The difference is much more about being a good (self-)manager and marathon runner and being a good sprinter.
What you demonstrate when doing a Ph.D. is that you can really dive into a topic and stick to one project, mostly by yourself, for several years. In other words: The challenge is more a psychological than an intellectual one. It does not take too much brain to dive into material over such a long period of time. Well, it might take some brain to come up with the idea at first. It also takes brain to connect all the dots. But really, you acquire self-management and motivation skills by holding on to the goal and actually reaching it.
All this together endows you with self-confidence — ideally. I can just suspect what it feels like if you actually know that you cheated in the process. I am not saying that Giffey did but anyone who does so will only punish him-/herself in the end. And here, it might actually be a positive thing that there is so much “emphasis on preparing students for academic careers.” Usually, I criticize that but now that I am thinking about it, it might also prevent people from just trying to get a Ph.D. by any means. If it is clear that an academic degree on this level actually and maybe mostly prepares you for an academic career as a researcher, some people might not aspire it in the first place. That would help. We do not need more Ph.D.s in the business world and in all other kinds of institutions. We need problem solvers with a humanistic mindset and the social skills to move others.
Please, people. Stop chasing Ph.D. titles. Chase a career instead that is fulfilling. If you do that, you will become excellent at what you do and if you are excellent, success will follow. No “Dr. so and so” is needed for happiness — especially since you are now seeing again that the universe will haunt you anyways. It can strike back by sending you reviewers who will discredit you publicly. It can strike back in the way that you will live with the bad conscience that your success is based on a lie. Remember, there is one person you can never run away from, no matter how hard you try: yourself.
Reflection Questions
1) Is there any goal in life that you would actually be willing to cheat for?
2) Are there jobs in your professional environment which people need a university degree for but you do not see a point in that? Which ones?
3) Do you treat people with a Ph.D. differently than others? If yes, how exactly?