Skyrocketing living costs and lack of government support are deterring potential PhD candidates. Experts say the obvious solution is to lift the stipend
The “but they’re working on curing children’s cancer!!!1!” is just an emotional hook to generate moral outrage. There are plenty of PhDs getting 18 an hour researching weapons systems, but they don’t make the news.
The first of those jobs is constructive and beneficial to both Australia and to humankind as a whole. The second is destructive and literally helps kill people. It’s invalid to trivialise that difference down to “moral outrage” - in fact morality need not be involved at all - health research is a vital job I’d like to see rewarded better.
I respond with a hearty “bollocks” to all your statements. The Guardian is using the children’s cancer statement as a hook to get you in to read their article, nothing more, nothing less.
Having said that, people on their way to PhDs should probably be paid more to entice them to do one if we are starting to get a shortage of PhDs around the place.
The first of those jobs is constructive and beneficial to both Australia and to humankind as a whole. The second is destructive and literally helps kill people. It’s invalid to trivialise that difference down to “moral outrage” - in fact morality need not be involved at all - health research is a vital job I’d like to see rewarded better.
I respond with a hearty “bollocks” to all your statements. The Guardian is using the children’s cancer statement as a hook to get you in to read their article, nothing more, nothing less.
Having said that, people on their way to PhDs should probably be paid more to entice them to do one if we are starting to get a shortage of PhDs around the place.
I am enthusiastically curious about why you claim that the curing of children’s cancer being beneficial is “bollocks”.