“Don’t Become a Scientist” 20 Years Later

I first read Jonathan Katz’s article Don’t Become a Scientist! around twenty years ago, when I was in graduate school. I ignored his advice and became a scientist anyway despite his stern warning that “I have known more people whose lives have been ruined by getting a Ph.D. in physics than by drugs.” Do I regret my choice? No, I do not, but it certainly sent me down a challenging career path. The real question that students faced then, and still face now, is whether there are available career paths that better suit their personal talents and desires. I wrote about this five years ago but, with all that has transpired since then, it felt like time for an update.

Let us start with Prof. Katz’s central thesis: “American science no longer offers a reasonable career path.” As a tenured professor, Katz clearly means American academic science. I agree that career prospects in that realm offer poor odds of securing the research professor job you ostensibly train for in graduate school. So, why would you invest your time in training for a job you are unlikely to get? Love of science and a talent for it are the best reasons. Becoming a scientist (we will adopt Katz’s assumption that this means getting a Ph.D.) is also a reasonable career move if you understand from the start that you will need to take a more sophisticated and creative approach to your career instead of blithely following the academic system’s path. In my experience, the adverse life outcomes that Katz laments typically come when individuals stay in the academic system (e.g., in the “holding pattern” postdocs he critiques) far longer than they should.

My reckoning came the year I finished my Ph.D. and found precisely one opening for a research professorship in my field. You will not be surprised to learn that my application received no response. After that experience, I shunned the holding pattern postdoc and started down my own path, aiming to stay close to research and learning how to navigate my career as I went. That journey has not been easy, but I have observed scientists who chose other trajectories (for example, my friend that left academic chemistry to become a patent attorney) and saw that those roads had their own significant difficulties.

If we scientists cannot count on the system to save our careers, we must count on ourselves and each other. I reached that conclusion for myself in the years after graduate school and it has been the driving force behind my writing and promotion of career resources. We all stand to benefit if young prospective scientists understand their prospects and build their career skills as early as possible. I think it is also important to recognize that self-reliance, social sophistication, and career creativity are the historical norm for successful scientists. From Galileo’s masterful courting of the Medici to Einstein’s time spent as a patent clerk, great scientific careers rarely follow linear paths. Therefore, rather than dissuading you from science altogether, I offer the following advice: “Don’t become a naïve scientist.”

Becoming a scientist with a sophisticated career outlook and skills still takes effort and practice, but there are more resources to help you on your journey now than there ever were before. You have already found a good place to start and will probably find our articles, books, and videos to be useful. We also keep a list of other major resources and programs from organizations like the American Physical Society. Finally, I recommend setting yourself up for a long-term practice of career development, perhaps by joining our newsletter to nudge you periodically. Many people seem to consider landing their first indefinite professional position as a “one and done” and immediately stop thinking about career development. A recent Ph.D. graduate once told me that they did not need career advice anymore because they had just landed the national lab job that they wanted and were all set. I can sympathize with this viewpoint. I think most of us would prefer to concentrate on the science and outsource career planning to our employers. That approach might even work in some cases, but the odds are stacked against it. Personal and professional circumstances evolve, funding waxes and wanes, entropy always increases, and change is a constant. Therefore, a long and prosperous career requires adaptability, thoughtfulness, and strategy. The effort that involves is a small price to pay for following the scientific path that beckons you, without ruining your life in the process.