Hide table of contents

I am in a career that I do not want to pursue. 

I have not been productive. I am quite stressed and anxious. But I am still keeping it and creating new science collaborations and research projects.

I have recently realised that I probably did university, a PhD, and started a scientific career just for FOMO. 

Mainly because of prestige, the perks of the academic life, and comparing myself to my peers (a lot of which had very clear ideas about their science careers since their start, and it shows it now). Obviously I was attracted to the science aspect of it, but I think it was just for fun (and also to please expectations of others).

But I have been not happy in my life for several years now. I think my anxiety has been manifesting itself into my body (mainly with head confusion and headaches).[1]

Even if I see myself as a professor in the next few years (something that you usually need to plan well in advance to create the right support network of people), I still fail to see how this can bring me happiness in my life.

After discovering certain online communities (like this one and lesswrong) I opened my eyes, and discovered that the pleasure of research can be pursued in different ways.

But I am still pondering on my future. Mainly because of fear.

My ideal scenario is the following: have a personal business (so that I can have "individual freedom"), while pursuing economic/social research in some university/research institute in a vibrant city. In particular, I would like to focus on topics like economic/social inequality. Something I have always promised myself to do after retiring (I would also love to do random bits of science, but I need to focus on single topics). 

I do not know how to do this (and how I could distinguish myself to gain the first bits of momentum). And on top of that, I am so afraid of starting a new path and being labelled as a failure.

I have not much interest in working in a company (tried internships and was unproductive). And do not see any place that makes me scream I wanna go there. Only reason I would consider it is money.

The problem is that I am the kind of person that will not use their mental resources to finish a task in absence of a deep sincere interest. On the other hand, to pursue the deep interest, I need to jump into the unknown. And I am afraid of regretting my choice.

 

  1. ^

    Someone suggested long-covid, but not sure where it leads.

12

0
0

Reactions

0
0
New Answer
New Comment


2 Answers sorted by

It sounds like we're around the same age, both a few years out of a PhD (mine was in bio). I'm happy to email/talk 1-on-1 with you about this:

  1. Do not continue down the academic path. Your mind and body are clearly telling you to stop! Instead, start applying for jobs as you wind down your ongoing projects.
  2. Probably don't start a business right now. Not unless you have a major technical edge in a lucrative area and a suite of business-relevant skills (I couldn't infer this from your post).
  3. If your internships were at large/established companies, I would be unsurprised that they went poorly. There are stark cultural differences between academia and the corporate world.
  4. Consider joining a startup. Culturally, this will be a smoother transition than to big corporate. You will be paid much more than you are as a postdoc. The people around you will generally be happier than your academic colleagues. And you'll build skills that are relevant to starting your own business one day.

Academia is wonderful in many ways, but it teaches people that life is linear, which is a damn lie. Life isn't linear! You have decades ahead of you that will be filled with personal growth and bringing happiness to other people.

Thanks a lot! I will consider it :)

Personally I cannot say much to this, but vs there being no answer/comment, here’s my naive suggestion:

If you haven’t already considered the 80000 hours career guide and their advising, that seems like a good resource for someone in your position.

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 25m read
 · 
Epistemic status: This post — the result of a loosely timeboxed ~2-day sprint[1] — is more like “research notes with rough takes” than “report with solid answers.” You should interpret the things we say as best guesses, and not give them much more weight than that. Summary There’s been some discussion of what “transformative AI may arrive soon” might mean for animal advocates. After a very shallow review, we’ve tentatively concluded that radical changes to the animal welfare (AW) field are not yet warranted. In particular: * Some ideas in this space seem fairly promising, but in the “maybe a researcher should look into this” stage, rather than “shovel-ready” * We’re skeptical of the case for most speculative “TAI<>AW” projects * We think the most common version of this argument underrates how radically weird post-“transformative”-AI worlds would be, and how much this harms our ability to predict the longer-run effects of interventions available to us today. Without specific reasons to believe that an intervention is especially robust,[2] we think it’s best to discount its expected value to ~zero. Here’s a brief overview of our (tentative!) actionable takes on this question[3]: ✅ Some things we recommend❌ Some things we don’t recommend * Dedicating some amount of (ongoing) attention to the possibility of “AW lock ins”[4]  * Pursuing other exploratory research on what transformative AI might mean for animals & how to help (we’re unconvinced by most existing proposals, but many of these ideas have received <1 month of research effort from everyone in the space combined — it would be unsurprising if even just a few months of effort turned up better ideas) * Investing in highly “flexible” capacity for advancing animal interests in AI-transformed worlds * Trying to use AI for near-term animal welfare work, and fundraising from donors who have invested in AI * Heavily discounting “normal” interventions that take 10+ years to help animals * “Rowing” on na
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
About the program Hi! We’re Chana and Aric, from the new 80,000 Hours video program. For over a decade, 80,000 Hours has been talking about the world’s most pressing problems in newsletters, articles and many extremely lengthy podcasts. But today’s world calls for video, so we’ve started a video program[1], and we’re so excited to tell you about it! 80,000 Hours is launching AI in Context, a new YouTube channel hosted by Aric Floyd. Together with associated Instagram and TikTok accounts, the channel will aim to inform, entertain, and energize with a mix of long and shortform videos about the risks of transformative AI, and what people can do about them. [Chana has also been experimenting with making shortform videos, which you can check out here; we’re still deciding on what form her content creation will take] We hope to bring our own personalities and perspectives on these issues, alongside humor, earnestness, and nuance. We want to help people make sense of the world we're in and think about what role they might play in the upcoming years of potentially rapid change. Our first long-form video For our first long-form video, we decided to explore AI Futures Project’s AI 2027 scenario (which has been widely discussed on the Forum). It combines quantitative forecasting and storytelling to depict a possible future that might include human extinction, or in a better outcome, “merely” an unprecedented concentration of power. Why? We wanted to start our new channel with a compelling story that viewers can sink their teeth into, and that a wide audience would have reason to watch, even if they don’t yet know who we are or trust our viewpoints yet. (We think a video about “Why AI might pose an existential risk”, for example, might depend more on pre-existing trust to succeed.) We also saw this as an opportunity to tell the world about the ideas and people that have for years been anticipating the progress and dangers of AI (that’s many of you!), and invite the br
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
Hi all, This is a one time cross-post from my substack. If you like it, you can subscribe to the substack at tobiasleenaert.substack.com. Thanks Gaslit by humanity After twenty-five years in the animal liberation movement, I’m still looking for ways to make people see. I’ve given countless talks, co-founded organizations, written numerous articles and cited hundreds of statistics to thousands of people. And yet, most days, I know none of this will do what I hope: open their eyes to the immensity of animal suffering. Sometimes I feel obsessed with finding the ultimate way to make people understand and care. This obsession is about stopping the horror, but it’s also about something else, something harder to put into words: sometimes the suffering feels so enormous that I start doubting my own perception - especially because others don’t seem to see it. It’s as if I am being gaslit by humanity, with its quiet, constant suggestion that I must be overreacting, because no one else seems alarmed. “I must be mad” Some quotes from the book The Lives of Animals, by South African writer and Nobel laureate J.M. Coetzee, may help illustrate this feeling. In his novella, Coetzee speaks through a female vegetarian protagonist named Elisabeth Costello. We see her wrestle with questions of suffering, guilt and responsibility. At one point, Elisabeth makes the following internal observation about her family’s consumption of animal products: “I seem to move around perfectly easily among people, to have perfectly normal relations with them. Is it possible, I ask myself, that all of them are participants in a crime of stupefying proportions? Am I fantasizing it all? I must be mad!” Elisabeth wonders: can something be a crime if billions are participating in it? She goes back and forth on this. On the one hand she can’t not see what she is seeing: “Yet every day I see the evidences. The very people I suspect produce the evidence, exhibit it, offer it to me. Corpses. Fragments of