A little less than 4 years ago, I carried my trembling body into Professor Intensity’s office. In my nervous voice, I proposed my thesis topic. In less than 3 seconds, it was shot down to hell. I exited the office as a soldier dragging her defeated body away from the bloody battlefield. Then a couple days later, Prof Intensity send me an email with a suggestion for a topic, and said “if it’s not up to snuff, it will not qualify as an honor thesis.” I spent the next 3 months exerting the hightest effort on it. It was deemed “impressive” and gave me the first taste of research.
But I did not care for it. Truth is the topic is so uninteresting that it will waste of anybody’s time to work on it.
I never want to repeat that again.
Between that time and now, I have added one more independent paper in between. That paper, however many readers it is exposed to due to its publisher, AGAIN, is a methodology paper, which cannot capture the attention of an audience. The content of that paper, AGAIN, was suggested by my advisor.
It does not matter that I made any contribution to the topic, the fact is, that topic is not originated by me.
Til now I have not gotten the hang of finding a good topic, independently. By good topic, I mean one that is worth my time to dig into it.
It is my fear that I can never find one that interests people.
Today I have to repeat the scene 4 years ago, dragging my trembling self into a professor’s office to propose a topic. THE topic which I will be devoting my time to in the rest of the year. THE topic that can again prove myself or not prove myeslf to be a researcher.
Well, he did not declare with enthusiasm that “IT IS SO SO SO INTERESTING!”. He did not even say that, “hmm, this is interesting.” But he said, “this is doable, and there might be something there.” And he signed the paper.
There might be something there.
Well, that’s progress from 4 years ago! I am so glad!
One of two old alumnaes is from Washington DC. I was telling them how my fields are going, and my reason for going to Washington DC for the summer (defending my decision to go to what according to them is an anti-dumping place).
Old alumni 1: Don’t scare her now. (scare me with regard to where I’m going to be working)
Old alumni 2 (who got one of the 8 Bs in Milton Friedman’s Price Theory): (to me) Well, the good thing about where you are going is that you may see a lot of data.
Me: Yes! That’s the main reason why I am going. I want to see the data. I have studied enough theory and I want to know what to do with them.
Old alumni 1: That’s the same as our old days too. But you guys probably wouldn’t even know it when THE data hit you on the face!
Me: ….
Filed under: Economics
Jacob articulately writes:
“Nowhere is this more pertinent than when the pros and cons of globalization are evaluated exclusively through the lenses of “jobs”; globalization is great if it creates jobs, and utterly unacceptable if it destroys them. While certainly recurrent in Europe, too, this view is expressed most strongly during elections in the United States. And that is no coincidence. The relatively less comprehensive and largely employment-based social safety net in America—where employees’ pensions and especially healthcare coverage are dependent on having a job—makes this inevitable. “
Easterly and Levine:
In the search for the secrets of long-run economic growth, a high priority should go to rigorously defining TFP, empirically dissecting it, and identifying the policies and institutions most conducive to its growth.
The thing about google is that it is the book of answers. When you want to ask a question with no one to ask it to, type it on google, and out pops the answer.
What is a Gumbel distribution?
How to destress?
What is a nerd chick?
And of course, the eternal question: How to live happily ever after?
Last week my mind has been on an auto pilot, and it decided to ponder how to plan for my long term happiness. I wondered, how come people always do things to subotage their own happiness? For example, when comes time to choose our career path, why do some people decide on things that make themselves miserable? I wondered about this on my field choices. Other people entered relationships they shouldn’t enter into and made themselves miserable.
Let’s take a fictional example — Sex and the City the movie. The movie illustrates a point: we are always our biggest energy for our own happiness. The characters all had to make decisions that will determine their happiness, but even when they are 40-50 year old, they still don’t always known their heart as they make the decision.
That’s right, the reason is that we don’t always know what our heart want.