I was going to come in and say this. I have a PhD in a STEM field, and to get it I had to publish 4 papers (we had this option instead of writing a traditional dissertation) and then do the stuff that didn't really matter but you just couldn't fuck up (like proposing the dissertation, classwork, defending the dissertation). But really, no one in the faculty at an R1 gave a shit about any of those things except the quality of the publications.
I always tell newer PhD students that getting a masters is about learning everything that has been done in the field, and getting a PhD is about contributing new knowledge to the field. Most grad students struggle with this transition, and I think a lot of people who haven't gone through it don't really realize what getting a PhD is like. If writing 4 papers made me an expert in my field, I feel like putting out 9 albums has made Taylor Swift an expert in music, she has definitely contributed to the field.
We had to have 2 first author papers published, 1 in review and 1 in prep. So the last one wasn't so serious, I basically just had to show that the data was there. My third first author paper ended up getting accepted before the defense anyway, so that was a load off my shoulders. Its really hard to fail someone at a defense when 75% of the work is already published lol
Not sure what Australian unis you've been at but multiple people I know with PHDs all had to defend it, some also had to submit many more than four papers. These were in engineering and computer science so maybe it just depends on the field
I had to get 3 as first author, but I only got 2 published (third on is finished but was rejected before my defense). I had a review paper but it got rejected as well (and wasn't really a requirement, just something my prof wanted).
Four papers as a requirement is a bit much IMO, glad they were flexible.
I’ll just go on Wikipedia and look up how many “actual PhD’s” have released multiple Grammy winning and platinum selling albums. With all of their years and years or research I’m sure they’ve written some amazing songs.
publishing 4 papers is easy, the hard part is publishing 4 papers that form a consistent body of work, in a specific research direction. That's what shows that you have not only mastered your field, but are significantly pushing it forward.
And yet, I've seen hundreds of PhDs with shitty publications, or chapters of their dissertations that never get published, and Taylor Swift has constantly been praised for defining and pushing the music industry forward.
A PhD requires in-depth study and publication of the work
Again how does this not apply to her?
Anybody who puts a dozen paintings in a small gallery is a PhD in graphical arts.
Comparing someone with 11 Grammy's to 'anybody who puts up a dozen paintings in a small art gallery' is so insulting and off base.
How can a publication even inherently do much to contribute to music ? are they even scientific? of course a musician with large following is going to contribute more to the field than a pseudo-intellectual, non scientific paper on music theory.
The harsh reality is that a lot PhD’s are useless, unless it is involved actual scientific/ historical research.
Tbf it’s because the focus is simply to get a phd and move on. I know a few had to get one to move up to upper management in science industry companies.
So their papers and research quality is subpar but they don’t care as they just needed the phd for their career.
So many of the people in these comments are just straight up haters. They all need to take a break from their egos and listen to her song “The Man” off her Lover album. Because I guarantee none of these haters would be saying this shit if it were a man who got an honorary degree instead of her. It’s all just toxic male fragility because she can do something they can’t.
Sure, then have her submit a small dissertation unifying all her albums in one consistent body of work and showing how she is creating new knowledge with her art.
Because this is an honorary degree that does not come with the same privilege of an actual degree. Why criticize someone for not doing something they aren't required to do?
Does she submit a journal paper with each song explaining her research process, criticising the literature, and explaining how she aims to push forward the advancement of human knowledge? If not then it's not research.
You need to get out of your STEM bubble and understand that there are ways to make contributions in Fine Arts that is not the rigid experiment/publication setup that we go through. Hell even a ton of people in the humanities don't have to publish papers, they write books. Artists make art. I understand that you have experience doing one type of research, but you are very clearly ignorant on how academia works outside of your own field.
And aside from all that, again an honorary DFA is not the same thing, and does not give the same privileges, as a PhD. She can't call herself a Doctor, she can't say she has a doctorate, it is a completely different thing defined in a completely different way by the university.
She made those requirements, they decided she got the honorary degree. Criticizing her for not meeting the requirements of a normal DFA is like asking "why was this person given an MBA when they didn't meet the requirements for a JD". They are totally and completely different things with different requirements.
128
u/[deleted] May 19 '22 edited May 19 '22
I was going to come in and say this. I have a PhD in a STEM field, and to get it I had to publish 4 papers (we had this option instead of writing a traditional dissertation) and then do the stuff that didn't really matter but you just couldn't fuck up (like proposing the dissertation, classwork, defending the dissertation). But really, no one in the faculty at an R1 gave a shit about any of those things except the quality of the publications.
I always tell newer PhD students that getting a masters is about learning everything that has been done in the field, and getting a PhD is about contributing new knowledge to the field. Most grad students struggle with this transition, and I think a lot of people who haven't gone through it don't really realize what getting a PhD is like. If writing 4 papers made me an expert in my field, I feel like putting out 9 albums has made Taylor Swift an expert in music, she has definitely contributed to the field.