(no title)
dntbnmpls | 5 years ago
What productive activity is she going to do with her PhD at the age of 66? It's a selfish egotistical vanity project.
> Wouldn't it make the later years even harder for them?
"Mate" did you read what I wrote?
"I'm all for continued learning but can't that be done in a non-credentialed manner that doesn't disadvantage young people?"
I'm all for the elderly learning and doing what they want. My problem is when their vanity project hurts younger people. A person with a PhD at 26 has a lot more to contribute than an old person with a PhD at 66. Not only that, the old person getting the PhD at 66 is taking a spot from a 26 year old. That is all.
I know the average age here is like 70, so I'm sure people will get upset about it. But from a practical and fairness perspective, I think it's better to let a 26 year old get the PhD and not the 66 year old. Let the 66 year old learn in an "off-credentialed" basis.
How about this, you have one slot open in your PhD program. You have equally qualified 26 and 66 year old. Which do you give that spot to? Most sane people would give it to the 26 year old.
bloodorange|5 years ago