HN Books @HNBooksMonth

> marginally more confident goes a long way

...not sure. My own piece of anecdata here is that healthy self confidence is not really correlated with better career opportunities at all in our industry. If anything, maybe even the opposite is true. In my mind, companies promote people who have internalized the pre-existing power structure and perpetuate it [1]. These tend to be of the "insecure overachiever" [2] type, rather than independent thinkers with healthy self-confidence.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Disciplined-Minds-Critical-Profession...

[2] https://www.amazon.com/Leading-Professionals-Power-Politics-...

Anyone who wants a serious non-conformist guide should absolutely, definitely read Disciplined Minds[1] by Jeff Schmidt. What an important book.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0742516857/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=...

There's a rather interesting perspective that touches some of these issues (and covers many more) in the following book: http://www.amazon.com/Disciplined-Minds-Critical-Professiona...

Some 'other' reviews - http://www.amazon.com/Disciplined-Minds-Critical-Professiona...

⬐ gjm11

Er, why have you linked specifically to the 2-star reviews? That seems a curious choice.

There is a great book on this topic by Jeff Schmidt called Disciplined Minds: http://www.amazon.com/Disciplined-Minds-Critical-Professiona...

Here's a review: http://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/01BRrt.html

⬐ cJ0th

hehe the book's website is hosted on tripod: http://disciplinedminds.tripod.com/

I didn't even know they're still alive.

Another interesting bit about the author (taken from the website above)

> Upon publication of Disciplined Minds, the American Institute of Physics fired author Jeff Schmidt. He had been on the editorial staff of Physics Today magazine for 19 years.

Earning a PhD certainly requires independent thought and action, but those are directed towards goals imposed by someone else, typically an adviser or one's committee, and the typical grad student rarely questions those goals.

This capacity for creative work in pursuit of others' ends is exactly why Rachel says PhDs are such valuable minions.

The book "Disciplined Minds" [1] makes this point in a radical way. I didn't agree with everything it said, but its point is that higher education selects for people willing to jump through arbitrary hoops for nebulous returns, and that that conformism is valuable to employers.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Disciplined-Minds-Critical-Professiona...

⬐ HarryHirsch

> Earning a PhD certainly requires independent thought and action, but those are directed towards goals imposed by someone else, typically an adviser or one's committee, and the typical grad student rarely questions those goals.

They don't question the advisor's goals? Do they now? I found that learning how to manage your boss is the one most important soft skill to have doing one's PhD. Compare that to your garden-variety BSc program, where the only thing you do is dutifully attend lectures and hand in homework.

I do wonder what kind of people makes that sort of statement. It can only be those with nothing more than a BSc - they have attended a university but don't know how the sausage is made.

⬐ calibraxis

"Disciplined Minds" was written by someone knowledgeable. From ch. 15:

"Remember also that profesional training is preceded by at least 16 years of preparatory socialization in the schools. Students who go on to professional training tend to be the "best" students—those who, among other things, excel at playing by the rules. [...]

"Alone in a large program designed to mold you, you cannot uphold an independent outlook for long. By yourself you can't even maintain a point of reference against which to sense that your outlook is drifting and to gauge how far it has drifted, because the training system, so as not to sabotage itself, excludes sources of critical distance."

It even meshes with what ender7 said. He wrote, "once you get into a PhD program you are shockingly, horrifyingly alone." And he pointed out the preparatory programs.

The book also delves into your point about "learning how to manage your boss". Many cynically "play the game" and generally do a bit better than those who don't. But even that's part of the system. You know the rules and still subordinate yourself, ironically believing you're in control of Big Boss. Remember, a boss is defined as someone who gives you commands which you obey. An inherently pathetic position, which many frankly call (wage) slavery. The court may plot and scheme, but the king is still their king.

⬐ njbooher

> The court may plot and scheme, but the king is still their king.

Try watching some Game of Thrones.

⬐ alanning

Forgive me if this is naive but I thought the way it's supposed to work is that you pick a phd advisor/program whose goals/research match your interests.

External funding means there will always be some compromise but couldn't we draw a similar analogy with companies and their customers? I would hope a phd program would allow someone to work on their interests (aligned with their advisor's) for a much longer time than a comparable job in industry would allow.

Disciplined Minds by Jeff Schmidt is an excellent book on this topic: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0742516857

There's a review of it here: http://disciplinedminds.tripod.com/higher-education-review.h...