写作与思考2013slate.com
“我退出学术界”：美国随笔中一个重要且不断壮大的子类型
“I Quit Academia,” an Important, Growing Subgenre of American Essays
导读
Slate 观察“我退出学术界”正成为美国散文的一个重要且不断增长的子类型。Hacker News 评论围绕为什么这么多人退出或劝退后来者、这是否是美国特有现象，以及终身教职和基础研究的代价展开。对写作者来说，这是一堂关于如何把私人职业选择写成公共制度批评、并用具体代价和反方视角增强可信度的课。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
把个人退出写成对制度问题的公开见证：先讲自己的选择，再揭示让选择变得必要的结构，如劳动制度、终身教职和经费机制。
- 02
用可核实的代价替代抽象抱怨：地理锁定、机会成本、收入差距等具体细节，比“学术界有毒”更有说服力。
- 03
强比喻要配证据：把学术界比作原教旨宗教或邪教能迅速凝聚论点，但必须用具体案例支撑，否则会沦为情绪宣泄。
- 04
保留反方与差异：承认有人在学术界如鱼得水、不同国家和领域的愤怒程度不同，能让“退出”叙事更可信、不显偏狭。
HN 评论精选
退出与警告构成同一类写作，个人见证能提前劝退后来者；把学术界比作原教旨宗教，使忏悔式写作成立。
退出者不仅是一个庞大而重要的子类型，警告别人不要进入的人也是——比如我，以及另外五六个人在那篇文章链接里所做的那样。如果这么多人在退出和/或警告别人不要走这条路，那可能是有充分理由的。文章里这一点尤其突出：学术界是一个充满博学自由思想者的职业，他们对一个不容忍批评的有毒劳动体系感到幻灭——所以离开的人常常享受新获得的、想说什么就说什么的能力（这里说的是“一个朋友”）。学术界的封闭和单一思维也非常像原教旨主义宗教（或者敢说，邪教），因此退出的人常觉得必须忏悔。若真是“原教旨主义宗教”，那么每个拯救了别人的异端都在做重要的工作；如果足够多的人这样做，信息可能传出去——法学院当然已经传出去了。总之，学术界在许多指标上确实变得越来越剥削，尤其是对工作者和研究生。人们在开始前知道得越多越好。
jseliger查看英文原文
Not only are quitters a large, important subgenre, but so are people warning others not to go—like I do: http://jseliger.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/what-you-should-know-before-you-start-grad-school-in-english-literature-the-economic-financial-and-opportunity-costs/ , and like half a dozen others do in various links from that essay. If so many people are quitting and/or warning others off the path, there may be a good reason why. This especially stands out from the article: Academe is a profession full of erudite free-thinkers who feel disillusioned by a toxic labor system in which criticism is not tolerated—so those who leave often relish the newfound ability to say anything they want (talking about “a friend” here). In its insularity and single-mindedness, academe is also very similar to a fundamentalist religion (or, dare I say, cult), and thus those who abdicate often feel compelled to confess. "A fundamentalist religion:" if so, each heretic who saves someone else is doing important work. If enough people do so, the message might get out; it certainly has for law schools: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/business/for-lsat-sharp-drop-in-popularity-for-second-year.html. Anyway, it does seem like academia has grown increasingly exploitative along many measures, especially for workers and grad students. The more people who know before they start, the better.
把“退出”去戏剧化：这是美国式的愤怒文体，欧洲更多把学术当成众多职业选项之一，写作时应意识到体裁的地域性。
有意思的是，这具体是一种美国散文类型。欧洲人也会加入或离开学术界，但无论哪边，人们似乎都没那么愤怒。你可以在大学工作，也可以在公司、智库、政府工作，或自己创业。不同的选择，不同的利弊。我喜欢大学，尽管当然有不喜欢的地方。有些人在职业生涯中会两个方向都走（欧洲各国差异很大）。我认识的一个图形学人士在学术界待了近十年，然后在公司做了四五年高级技术职员，现在又回到学术界。在计算机科学，典型权衡是公司给你更多资源但直接自由少一些；学术界资源少，得自己申请经费，但资源约束是主要约束，是对研究自由的间接限制。很多其他差异取决于偏好。学术界更容易发论文（无需批准且被重视）；工业界更容易做软件开发。学术日程更灵活，在家工作和非朝九晚五很常见；教学通常是必需的，这可能是优点也可能是缺点。
mjn查看英文原文
It's somewhat interesting that this is specifically an American essay genre. People join or leave academia in Europe as well, but people seem less angry about it either way. You can work at a university or you can work at a company or a think-tank or in the government or start your own company. Different choices, different pros and cons. I like the university, though there are things I don't like about it certainly. Some people will go in both directions during a career (this highly varies by country within Europe, though). One graphics guy I'm acquainted with spent almost a decade in academia, then spent 4-5 years working as senior technical staff at a company, and now is back in academia. In CS, the typical tradeoff is that you get more resources but somewhat less direct freedom at companies. In academia you have fewer resources and have to bring in your own grants, but the resource constraint is the main constraint, a sort of indirect restriction on your research freedom (how strong of one depends on your resource needs). Lots of other differences depending on your preferences. Easier to publish papers in academia (no approval needed and it's valued); easier to do software development in industry (resources/coordination exists, and it's valued). Academic schedules tend to be more flexible; work-from-home and non-9/5 schedules are common and don't typically require approval. Teaching is typically required, which can be a pro or a con. Etc.
终身教职带来地理锁定，这是“退出/留下”叙事里常被忽略的具体代价，适合作为个人散文中的结构性细节。
我妻子在学术界，不过不是象牙塔。她在加州一所社区学院，既在终身教职轨道上，也做行政项目主任。所以她的经验可能不能完全对应这篇文章。学术界有很多固有问题，大多数考虑进入这个领域的人并没真正想过。我认为最大的问题是，对99%的教授来说，一旦拿到终身教职，他们就被地理上锁死了。这很糟。我和妻子一直一只脚在门外。我们跟着工作走。但现在她上了终身教职轨道，我们会想这是不是我们终老的地方。想起来挺悲哀。你不断从这些人那里听到这种事。我的一位老数学教授专门有个页面讲这个。他抱怨住在夏威夷，以及妻子因此和他离婚。总之，这对学者是个大问题。我想过，觉得最大的问题就是终身教职制度。应该废除。教授应该能换机构而不用操心整个过程，也因此应该得到更好的报酬。
mililani查看英文原文
My wife is in academia. Although, not in the ivory towers. She's at a community college in California, and she's both on the tenured faculty track and administration as a program director. So, her experiences may not speak entirely to this article. There are lots of problems inherent with academia that most people thinking about this field are not really thinking about. The biggest problem, I think, is that for most 99% of all professors, once they are tenured, they are LOCKED down geographically. And, that sucks. My wife and I have one foot out the door all the time. We go where the jobs are. But, now that she's on the tenure track, we wonder if this is where we'll lay down and die. It's pretty sad, when I think about it. You hear about it time and time again from so much of these guys. One of my old math professors had a page devoted to this. He complained a lot about living in Hawaii and how his wife divorced him because of it. He had a page up here: http://www.math.hawaii.edu/~lee/ But, apparently, after some time he decided to take down the more controversial stuff. The index.html page to his ramblings are down. Anyways, that's a huge problem for academics. And, I thought about it, and I think the biggest problem is the whole tenure thing. I think it should be abolished. Professors should be able to move to new institutions without worrying about that entire process, and they should be paid a better wage because of it. It should be like any other free market enterprise we have nowadays. And, Universities should also be able to get rid of dead weight. I've had some professors in the past who just gave up on research and life. For example, said professor mentioned above. He gave up on math research because the University kept screwing them over on pay. He retired with only 17 publications under his name. My other friend who is now a tenured math professor at a 4 year college has 17 publications at just 37 years of age. My other friend who has been teaching for about 10 years now has only 2 publications: his math Ph.D. dissertation, and a one page paper that probably isn't worth the paper it's printed on. Anyways, I think it's high time tenure is made obsolete. It gives professors more latitude to move, probably better pay, and more incentive to do research or teach better. It also gives schools and students the opportunity to get better teachers and lose the dead weight.
区分“不适合学术”与“学术失去基础研究人才”，让退出叙事不止于个人情绪，而指向公共损失。
退出学术界的有两种人：想生产研究的人，和不想的人。对后者，我只能说，也许这里不适合你，祝你好运。对前者，我为他们在学术界之外的机会感到惋惜。基础研究——建立基础、让这条评论出现在你眼前、让数据包在全球传输以维持经济运行的研究——近十年来一直在衰退。企业、非大学的基础研究下降得更厉害。Hacker News 读者在计算机科学有很多研究实验室可选，情况比多数人好。对基础数学研究，大学之外的选择更少；如果你像这里多数读者一样，对做机密研究或与声名不佳的三字母机构合作有伦理问题，那几乎不存在。但对我其他学术项目的同行——我想知道世界会失去多少，因为伦理学家、地质学家、甚至攻读高级教育学位、追求教学艺术的人正在离开学术界。
AaronFriel查看英文原文
There are two kinds of people who quit academia: those who want to produce research and those who don't. To the latter, I say, oh well, it perhaps was not the place for you. Good luck and best fortune. To the former, I lament their opportunities outside of academia. Basic research, the research that built the foundation that makes this comment appear before your eyes and zips packets of data around to make this economy function, has been on the decline for near a decade now. And the decline in corporate, non-university basic research has been even more profound. People who read Hacker News are probably in a better state than most when it comes to this, there are many choices of research lab to work at in computer science. For basic mathematical research, your choices outside of a university setting are a little more slim; and nearly nonexistent, if you, like most of the readers here, have ethical problems with producing classified research or working with 3 and 4 letter agencies of recent disrepute. But to my peers in other academic programs - I wonder how much the world will lose because ethicists, geologists, and even people who are pursuing the art of pedagogy in advanced educational degrees are leaving academia. Postscript: I don't mean any of the above to be exhaustive lists of academic fields affected or not affected. It's not just computer science that has ample opportunity for postgraduate research outside of a university, and it's not only the philosophers, geologists, and educators who are finding difficulty. To wit, I don't even know if that's the case for geologists, but I have heard of the woes of finding even graduate study programs in philosophy and education. Post-postscript: I forgot to cite sources, and one summary, though five years dated, is here: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsb0803/start.htm?CFID=12379966&CFTOKEN=70354711&jsessionid=f0307725d648dd553ba513586d223fe107f4#declining - there the NSF documents declining basic research from industry and declining funding from government.
同类还值得读
不要想好再写，要写来思考
Don’t think to write, write to think
这篇短文主张不要把写作当成思考完成后的记录，而要把写作本身当作思考的工具：动笔的过程会逼出想不清楚的地方。
写作与思考2022 · 553 分 · 145 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作即思考：学会自信地写作
Writing Is Thinking: Learning to Write with Confidence
这是一篇讲“写作即思考”的博客：作者认为写作不是把想好的东西誊写出来，而是借助写作本身把想法想清楚，因此写作者应当建立信心、敢于先写烂稿。
写作与思考2019 · 529 分 · 83 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何用写作来思考
How to think in writing
这篇文章讨论的是「用写作来思考」：作者认为写作不只是把想清楚的东西表达出来，更是想清楚本身的工具——文字落在纸上，你才有机会看见自己思路里的跳跃、含混和漏洞。
写作与思考2024 · 424 分 · 120 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作，帮你逃离默认的人生设置
Write to Escape Your Default Setting
文章的核心主张就写在标题里：写作是帮你逃离「默认设置」的手段——日常的思维和表达都有惯性默认的默认模式，而落笔能逼你跳出来，重新看清自己到底在想什么、要说什么。
写作与思考2025 · 407 分 · 93 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作就是思考
Writing is thinking
文章以“写作即思考”为题，讨论写作不只是把已有想法记录下来，而是帮助澄清、组织和推进思考的过程。
写作与思考2025 · 330 分 · 128 评4 条写作要点编辑精选