Ph.D in Cognitive Neuroscience: Is Complementary Postgraduate Degree Worth It?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adderall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Neuroscience Ph.d
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the value of pursuing multiple postgraduate degrees, particularly in relation to a Ph.D. in cognitive neuroscience. Participants explore the implications of obtaining additional degrees in fields such as mathematics, physics, biology, philosophy, and linguistics, and whether this would enhance career prospects or knowledge acquisition compared to self-study.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a desire to pursue a Ph.D. in cognitive neuroscience and questions the realism and worth of obtaining additional degrees in other fields.
  • Another participant suggests that obtaining Ph.D.s in mathematics and physics would complement the cognitive neuroscience degree.
  • A participant raises practical concerns about the time commitment required for multiple Ph.D.s, estimating it could take around 12 years to complete two separate degrees, and questions the value of a second Ph.D.
  • It is noted that Ph.D. programs are not typically designed for students seeking multiple degrees, which may complicate the process of admission for a second Ph.D.
  • A participant inquires about how to demonstrate extensive knowledge from multiple fields in job applications, expressing concern about the perception of self-learning on a CV.
  • Another participant asks for clarification on the type of job being considered, specifically mentioning a desire to work in affective neuroscience.
  • One participant suggests that the topic of affective neuroscience could be the focus of the first Ph.D. thesis, potentially negating the need for a second Ph.D.
  • It is mentioned that others in the field of affective neuroscience likely only hold one Ph.D., implying that multiple degrees may not be necessary for success in that area.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the necessity and practicality of pursuing multiple Ph.D.s, with no consensus reached on whether it is beneficial or realistic. Concerns about time commitment and the effectiveness of self-learning are also debated.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the assumption that obtaining multiple Ph.D.s may detract from specialization, and the discussion does not resolve the question of how best to demonstrate interdisciplinary knowledge in job applications.

Adderall
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Hey all! I have a personal question, but hopefully this will be useful to more than just me.

I'm going for a Ph.D in cognitive neuroscience. I am convinced this is what I want to do. Once I've achieved that, is it totally unrealistic to attempt another postgraduate degree in another field (say, mathematics / physics / biology / philosophy / linguistics)?

Even if it is realistic, is it worth it? For example, I find linguistics (Kripke, Chomsky etc.) indispensable for understanding certain papers on the brain; ditto abstract algebra / quantum theory / philosophy of mind. However, I don't know if this means I actually want a degree in these fields, if a degree in these fields would means knowledge vs. no degree, or if having multiple degrees would improve my career prospects as a brainguy.

In short, would I be better off with a Ph.D in my field and a ton of self-study in others, or multiple Ph.Ds (and less self-study)?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You should get a math and physics PhD to compliment it.
 
You may want to consider the practical aspects of what you're asking.

The average amount of time it takes to earn a PhD is roughly six years of graduate school. That's after you've met the requirements to get into an graduate program in the field in the first place, which usually requires majoring in that field for four years as an undergraduate. Assuming that you have perhaps double-majored as an undergraduate and are qualified to get into multiple disciplines then you're looking at 12 years of your life to complete the two separate degrees. It's possible that once you've learned how to do research that you'd cut some time off of that, but even if the second one only takes half the time - that's still nine years.

And what would a second PhD gain you? Not much. You see at some point you're going to end up sacrifcing something. In order to earn that second PhD, you would more-or-less have to leave your first field. And during that time the field won't wait for you. If you try to do both at once, the best you can realistically hope to achive is being half as good as those who've specialized in either field.

You would likely be better served developing one area of expertise and then getting involved in collaborations that involve other experts. You would still have to do a lot of self-learning. (Any research involves a lot of self-learning).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
A more serious answer would say PhD programs are not in the business of training students for their nth phd degree where n > 1 so you would be hard pressed to find someone to take you in. It also isn't the best reflection when you can't decide a focus for an educational system based on focuses (majors/topics).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks! This is exactly what I wanted to know.

I have another question. Suppose a job requires extensive knowledge from multiple fields. Is the interview process the only way to communicate that you, the applicant, actually possesses this extensive knowledge? It's just that, to me, "self-learning" looks ugly on a CV.
 
Last edited:
Adderall said:
I have another question. Suppose a job requires extensive knowledge from multiple fields.

What kind of job are you imagining?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
What kind of job are you imagining?

Research. Specifically I want to work in affective neuroscience. Eventually I hope I can guide my own research, but for now, I suppose monkey work for someone else. Is that naive/too simplistic? That is, am I leaving a lot of steps out?
 
Last edited:
Adderall said:
Research. Specifically I want to work in affective neuroscience.
Why can't you make that the subject of your first PhD thesis? Then you won't have to get that second PhD.
 
Adderall said:
Research. Specifically I want to work in affective neuroscience. Eventually I hope I can guide my own research, but for now, I suppose monkey work for someone else. Is that naive/too simplistic? That is, am I leaving a lot of steps out?
There are people doing research on that topic and very very likely they only have one phd
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
10K