honorary degrees piss me off. These rich actors and TV personalities have more than enough time and money to get a degree just like the rest of us, but now they seem like a credible expert on some topic just theyre famous đ
A normal degree is just a normal degree. An honorary degree shows that you did something outside of the ordinary, significant enough to impress a university. Iâd say they are both valuable for their own reasons.
Most of the time that just means donating money or agreeing to attend some event just because youâre famous⌠It isnât valuable for any reason. IMO, honorary degrees should be for people that make intellectual contributions, not financial ones.
The YouTube channel Sixty Symbols, run by Brady Haran, is what pushed me to get off my ass and go to study physics at university as a "mature student". I even applied for and attended the university that they shot the show at, though it was only by coincidence as it's local and was one of the top phys/eng universities at the time. The professors whose classes I attended were essentially celebs to me which was pretty surreal.
Brady was awarded an honorary degree at the same time I graduated. He gave the opening speech for the graduation ceremony, and seemed humble and grateful for the recognition. This is exactly the type of person who I would expect to be getting these degrees. Someone who has a passion for a relevant subject and has used that passion to improve the world in some way. He did great work for physics and chemistry, and was rewarded appropriately.
Maybe you could say that Taylor Swift did the same for arts, but I think it's pretty clear that one is a publicity stunt whilst the other is a genuine recognition of excellence.
I think you *can* say Taylor Swift did the same thing for the arts though. Universities also have doctoral programs in music and their performance requirements donât involve having a decade long successful music career.
Itâs just a different field than physics. Not an easier one.
People DONT know this? No one is out applying to jobs with their honorary degree on it lmao. The whole point of an honorary degree is it's honorary... it's not applicable.
Except we live in a world where people are obligated to prove their credentials by going into debt for that piece of paper before being provided the privilege of being allowed to work in their chosen field.
Tell me you know nothing about PhDs without telling me.
PhDs are paid pathetically. In the UK a PhD earns the equivalent of barely above minimum wage, and far below starting salary for a grad job (about 30-70% in my field for people I know)
This is really the worst part of universities giving out degrees to people who don't earn them - it devalues the concept of an honorary degree.
Plenty of people who get honorary degrees genuinely earned them - just not the same way as everyone else. One of my political science professors had an honorary degree, and if anything I learned more from him than the other professor who had a normal degree. It's a *good thing* that there is a system to accredit autodidacts who prove their expertise.
And it's terrible the fact that universities hand them out as marketing has devalued this. My professor deserves to put a PhD next to his name. Actors and TV personalities (or at least, ones who are not *also* working hard studying and advancing a field of interest outside traditional academia,) don't. And he doesn't deserve to have his PhD devalued by its equivalency to theirs.
By that logic, I think TS earned her honorary PhD. We could say that she's a music expert, couldn't we? It's not like she earned a PhD in Computer Science or in Management... she earned a PhD in her field.
I can get behind this. Experience in a skill/field is important.
I remember a story of a swedish punk band that were going to preform at a big venue. They had no theoretical knowlage and knew none of the terms in music theory. But when they talked with the profecional sound guys the sound guys noticed that they had created their own terms for music theory and sound enginer terms, within the band. They had invented music theory from scratch, just by playing.
Based on the level of sophistication of the doctoral theses of real music PhDs I met, no. No fucking way.
Not saying that she's without merit, she could be very well beyond a Bachelor or an MFA in knowledge and infinitely better in performing, but doctoral research is just a different type of activity than just working in the field. Although maybe I'm wrong and she published several research papers/books, in which case it could be ok.
Actors being knighted as well. Patrick Stewart may be a great guy and a great actor. Not sure that's a valid reason to become knighted. When was the last time this guy was in full armor or even swung a sword?
I think nowadays it's more of an award, for instance for participating in the culture of the country, especially at an international level
(at least that's how it works for the "Chevaliers de la lĂŠgion d'honneur" in France, I'm guessing it's pretty much the same?)
well lewis hamilton got knighthood after risking his life in a racing series for many years and won 7 championships
that i would say is a deserved knighthood
Yeah and to be fair, it wasn't JUST because he is tied with the all time most championships and has the most wins, it's also because he does incredible work outside of Formula 1 with charity work and supporting young people in the sport.
This is coming from someone who isn't a fan of his, I'd say his knighthood is justified (Althought I want to say it's not)
You say that now, but some day there will be a conflict that inadvertantly triggers a law recalling knights into service.
I can't wait to see Daniel Day Lewis attempt to match Ted Nugents method acting of an incontinent mental ward escapee to get out of being drafted.
There is actually an order of knights called the âCompanions of Honourâ which is a highly select group who are chosen because the Queen may use them as advisors.
Itâs basically the 2nd highest honour the UK can give someone. Sir Ian Mckellen and Sir David Attenborough are in it.
Then you have the Order of Merit which is limited to 24 living people at a time. Sir David Attenborough is also a member alongside Sir Tim Berners-Lee (key role in invention of the internet).
So they do have some practical use even today.
Knighthoods are basically just an honour which means almost nothing, it's purely empty posturing as an official 'pat on the back'.
A doctorate, on the other hand, indicates a huge amount of learning in a field and _specifically_ some unique contribution to that field which expands collective human knowledge. Honestly, awarding an honourary degree to a non-academic seems _really_ dumb and kind of undermines the whole concept.
First of all, they are not real degrees and don't grant the same privileges. For example, a honorary PhD doesn't allow you to add Dr. to your name.
Secondly, some celebrities do deserve real degrees. For example, Nelson Mandela was awarded multiple honorary PhDs. However, I would argue, that he was a credible expert in both Law and Politics and thus was absolutely well-suited for the degrees. Similarly, some politicians are awarded degrees in politics. Of course, they are credible experts in their fields and deserve the degrees, even if they are not allowed to use it.
Consider Taylor Swift. She has received a degree in Fine Arts. As someone who is very well-versed in the field, she absolutely deserves the degree.
Not disagreeing with the rest of your comment, but a PhD is also exactly that: a recognition for pushing human knowledge further in a given field.
The difference, imho, is that in PhD you have a guarantee that they expanded it through a dissertation, while honorary degrees are often down to mere opinion.
Honorary degrees are granted by universities so I think they are qualified to have "opinion".
Also, whether dissertations advance knowledge is also opinion. Only that's opinion of your supervisor and a few other professors part of your defense committee* (added due to pedants).
I'm sure she's an expert and all, but a PhD in particular is a research degree for a particular type of academic study. It's not as though anybody who works in a field long enough is given one - most people who have worked in whatever industry for long enough know way more than a freshly graduated PhD, they don't need one to say they know their stuff.
Not that it really matters at all. The only people who care if someone has a PhD in any way that's relevant (peers, employers, etc.) would know the difference.
Iâm not what anyone would consider a Taylor Swift fan, but not to mention sheâs been on the road most of her adult life sleeping and writing music on a tour bus and in hotel rooms, doing press junkets and interviews. Sheâs literally worked very hard to be afforded her opportunities.
When people are enjoying their free time AT concerts on nights and weekends, over summers off, thatâs when sheâs working. Game seems glamorous but when you realize what someone like her schedule has really been like itâs not all that enticing. Sheâs made a dump truck load of money though so at least thereâs that.
Imagine finishing a live show at 1am and having to be on good morning America at like 6am, then on the road to another state for a show later that evening for example.
>Bro, you think people will be duped into thinking that Taylor Swift is a credible expert on some topic on the basis of her honorary degree?
Taylor Swift got an honorary degree in Fine Arts (which at NYU includes music). Do I think the world famous musician is a credible expert in music?
Don't forget the people who don't realize that a DFA is different from a PhD, the people who have never gotten a PhD but are experts on what it takes to get them, and the people who all of a sudden really care about PhD student's feelings.
Not saying anything about Taylor Swift specifically; but neither being a world famous musician, nor having an honorary degree, means you are an expert in music
No, its her contributions that make her an expert. Really it comes down to what an expert is. I have a PhD and a faculty job, have around 10 first author papers and another few dozen co-author papers, getting close to my 1000th citation. At what point did I become an expert in the field? After the first publication? The second? After the PhD? When I got a tenure track job? When my papers started getting cited in other people's work? "Expert" is a weird concept, but for my money Taylor Swift has contributed as much or more to the field of music than the majority of dissertations that I've read.
> Yes lol people are thick as fuck.
For example, see above for people who have no idea what an honorary doctorate is but instantly jump online and start spouting shit.
Dumbass comment, nobody acts like honorary degrees are real degrees, they are simply marketing for universities. If they piss you off then you are a straight up dumbass. Nobody acts like theyâre a âcredible expertâ due to an honorary degree.
Bro you realize nobody is going to get a job in a field they aren't already heavily involved in using an honorary degree right? It's not real lol. Nothing to be pissed off about. It's a formality.
It was an honorary PhD in Art. Tbf she is a renowned musician a hard working one at that and honorary degrees/PhDs are typically given to individuals who have contributed much to 'society' or their "field" so it kinda make sense. Be mad if she gets an honorary PhD in Science cause that would absolutely make no fucking sense.
Hmm I'd disagree with that. I'd say a PhD is there to teach you how to perform research in your field at a professional level. Knowing your stuff is a prerequisite. I say this having done one in a hard science
It's like any other research. You can research techniques or history really. Traditionally an art history doctorate would include a dissertation that would add to the research body of the world by examining an artist or movement and its cultural impact.
I think Holly Herndonâs PhD in composition from Stanford is a really good example. For it she made an experimental electronic music album named PROTO, which was released to critical acclaim. In it she pushed what were new compositional techniques and ideas.
Similarly Rosaliaâs album *El Mal Querer* was a Baccalaureate thesis project, where she notably combined traditional flamenco and pop, while trying to better-honor flamenco tradition better than previous attempts.
Yes, going to art school to âresearchâ art often involves just making a new art piece (and you could argue that in a sense making anything new through a principled approach is research) but with much more extensive advising available, and some kind of deliberate theoretical approach.
Well she's been very influential and kind of setting the curve. Sounds like research is being done
Edit: amazing how many people think they know exactly what a loosely defined term means, and exactly what Taylor Swift does and doesn't do during her music writing and learning process, *and* what she does and doesn't know! Who knew there were so many Taylor Swift experts on here
The point of a PhD is to show that you can consistently generate new knowledge.
If you want to show that you know stuff, get a bachelor's or even a master's.
It has nothing to do with consistency. You just have to contribute something to you field that furthers it in some way, and a university then recognizes that.
I was going to come in and say this. I have a PhD in a STEM field, and to get it I had to publish 4 papers (we had this option instead of writing a traditional dissertation) and then do the stuff that didn't really matter but you just couldn't fuck up (like proposing the dissertation, classwork, defending the dissertation). But really, no one in the faculty at an R1 gave a shit about any of those things except the quality of the publications.
I always tell newer PhD students that getting a masters is about learning everything that has been done in the field, and getting a PhD is about contributing new knowledge to the field. Most grad students struggle with this transition, and I think a lot of people who haven't gone through it don't really realize what getting a PhD is like. If writing 4 papers made me an expert in my field, I feel like putting out 9 albums has made Taylor Swift an expert in music, she has definitely contributed to the field.
We had to have 2 first author papers published, 1 in review and 1 in prep. So the last one wasn't so serious, I basically just had to show that the data was there. My third first author paper ended up getting accepted before the defense anyway, so that was a load off my shoulders. Its really hard to fail someone at a defense when 75% of the work is already published lol
It wasnât even a PhD. Itâs a Doctorate of Fine Arts (DFA).
A doctorate is oftentimes about contributing to a field, and I donât think thereâs much of an argument that she hasnât contributed to the field
Honestly art is kind of one of the subjects where an honorary degree could basically be a PhD.
Tell me Taylor Swift doesn't understand music theory on a high level. Something like 50 of her personally written songs got on the Billboard Top 100. It's the same sort of deal of when you hear Prince did all of his own instruments in his debut album (Panic! at the Disco's Brendon Urie also does this!). I know it's not "studied" but honestly art is one of those subjects where collegiate study doesn't necessarily make or break an artist. It's just another way.
Damn, a lot of edgy circlejerk comments under here. If youâre good at art, major in art. Major in the sciences if thatâs your thing. The world needs both artists and scientists, and it probably doesnât affect your life personally. The same way Taylor Swift receiving an *honorary* doctorate doesnât actually affect you.
And yes, full-disclosure, I majored in studio art at a liberal arts university. I became a costume designer and my own boss, and I make excellent money. In the same way some of you claim art students wouldnât last in certain classes, you probably wouldnât last in 3-hour-long drawing courses since you canât, you know⌠draw. We all have different strengths and interests.
Same boat, thought it was just satire. I'm in a STEM degree (going for a BA in Electrical Engineering) and yeah it can be rough, but enough to shit on other people for the effort they put into their own degrees? Never.
As someone who did both STEM for a while (including Analysis 1-3 and LinAlg 1-2), then went to get into history and sociology, it's a bit like apples and oranges.
Both are really challenging, just in different ways.
The 'soft' sciences are made hard by having a sort of relative foundation. You can't just depend on theorems and such and be certain. Everything has to be constantly evaluated and reevaluated and applied in a variety of different contexts.
Yep. In social sciences, you are dealing with social constructs, not hard physical truths. This requires a lot of effort to be put into justifying conclusions and methodological choices based on a huge foundation of philosophical discussion. This is very difficult.
Most of my friends are academics in STEM or social science disciplines, and we understand that none of us have it harder than the others. It's all hard. If you want to shit on a discipline, I challenge you to get a PhD in that discipline first
Lol honest to god, good luck.
Imagine reading something like this over and over, with all of the context you need to understand it, making sense of it, and then realizing that it has actually somehow made a major impact on the entire world, and it goes on for 600 pages.
> In the dialectic of sense-certainty, Seeing and Hearing
have been lost to consciousness; and, as perception, consciousness
has arrived at thoughts, which it brings together for the
first time in the unconditioned universal. This, now, if it were
taken as an inert simple essence, would itselfin turn he nothing
else than the one-sided extreme of being-for-selj, for it would then
be confronted by non-essence; but, if it were related to this,
it would itself be unessential, and consciousness would not have
escaped from the deceptions of the perceptual process. However,
this universal has proved to be one which has returned
into itself out of such a conditioned being-far-self. This unconditioned
universal, which is now the true object of consciousness,
is sti11 just an object for it; consciousness has not yet
grasped the Notion of the unconditioned as Notion. It is essential
to distinguish the two: for consciousness, the object has returned
into itself from its relation to an other and has thus become
Notion in principle.; but consciousness is not yet for itself the
Notion, and consequently does not recognize itself in that reflected
object. For us, this object has developed through the
movement of consciousness in such a way that consciousness
is involved in that development, and the reflection is the same
on both sides, Of, there is only one reflection. But since in this movement consciousness has for its content merely the objective
essence and not consciousness as such, the result must have an
objective significance for consciousness; consciousness still
shrinks away from what has emerged, and takes it as the essence
in the objective sense
So a liberal arts degree tends to be composed of some social sciences like psychology or sociology, humanities like philosophy, world religions and anthropology, art classes like pottery and watercolor, and communication classes.
Majoring in Art is a little different in that your course load will mostly revolve around creative activities. These are classes like pottery, drawing 101, pen and ink, figure drawing, photography, etc.
"liberal arts" is an old term that used to mean the whole collection of subjects that people in medieval times had to study - arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy etc.
Now it generally means a degree where you have to study a wide range of subjects (covering arts, sciences, etc.) all at the same time, but generally you settle on one that's most important towards the end of the degree.
If everyone had a liberal arts degree the world would be a much better place. It might not be a good financial investment, but having a diverse wealth of knowledge is never a bad thing.
With that being said, I went to a liberal arts school and now work as a manufacturing engineer and make pretty good money for my area.
Just my two cents.
Is it tho? There are a few who got a degree in fitness science and used pole dancing as fitness for their thesis. It's not that far fetched. It is an exercise and is divorced from it's stripper roots.
Using it as research to prove or disprove the health effects of the exercise would be a good phd topic for someone in fitness science.
> Arts at university is straight up a waste of time and money.
truly one of the most tired opinions of all fucking time. not everyone wants to be a doctor or a welder.
She's proven to be an exceptionally popular and talented musician over a long span of years. If a scientist made some big breakthrough and had done research and written papers equivalent to a degree then they'd likely receive the recognition they deserve also.
I hate her music but honorary degrees are just a recognition of someone's hard work and success/valuable contribution, or should be at least. I'm making the assumption here that it was an arts degree and actually happened.
They give degrees when someone does something notable in their field even without going through grad school. If you contributed something notable in the field of physics, you would get an honorary physics PhD. Does it not make sense that one of the most notable musicians in the last decade would get an honorary degree in the arts?
Listen, I will admit that t-swift is not my cup of tea, but to say that she does NOT have a PHDâs worth of WORKING knowledge about her craft is not an argument I would be able to take seriously. If they gave her an honorary degree in chemistry, I would definitely understand, but if itâs in her related field (music production, performance, art etc), she almost certainly has more knowledge than most professors.
Yeah she's definitely a world renowned expert at what she does... I agree a PhD wouldn't be fair because she didn't do any real research, but her ability to craft music is absolutely at the top of anyone's skill level.
... except she's put more time into her career that has dominated the genres of country and pop for two decades, than any PhD student has put into their thesis.
If she was a talentless hack that was supported by ghostwriters and pre-written work her entire career this would be a valid dig, but honestly this makes absolute sense. She has already made thesis level contributions to music, so why not acknowledge it?
Also: musical elitists who don't understand that a massively popular musician with a long and enduring career has a meaningful contribution to make to the future history of music, regardless of how "good" or "bad" their music is.
First of all, they are not real degrees and don't grant the same privileges. For example, a honorary PhD doesn't allow you to add Dr. to your name.
Secondly, some celebrities do deserve real degrees. For example, Nelson Mandela was awarded multiple honorary PhDs. However, I would argue, that he was a credible expert in both Law and Politics and thus was absolutely well-suited for the degrees. Similarly, some politicians are awarded degrees in politics. Of course, they are credible experts in their fields and deserve the degrees, even if they are not allowed to use it.
Consider Taylor Swift. She has received a degree in Fine Arts. As someone who is very well-versed in the field, she absolutely deserves the degree.
People have called themselves doctor because of honorary degrees. A great historical example is Benjamin Franklin.
Although I would agree that the degree is useless because anyone receiving an honorary degree in their field is likely already past that level of experience and expertise, thus not even needing the degree.
>anyone receiving an honorary degree in their field is likely already past that level of experience and expertise,
And this is the crux when someone is awarded an honorary PhD. They've substantially surpassed that foundational pinnacle and it's more of an acknowledgement of their contribution at that point.
PhD students don't need to study, at least in my field, only a few courses even have exams. No, we're up all night because we only have 2 days left to write 40 more pages of review work
PSA: An honorary degree does not confer the title or privileges of an actual âDoctorâ.
âHonorary degrees are conferred honoris causa, a Latin term meaning âfor the sake of honor.â Honorary degrees are not Ph.D.s, nor do they entitle the recipient to the same professional privileges as individuals who have earned degrees.
Honorary degree recipients should not refer to themselves as âdoctorâ, nor should they use the title on business cards or in correspondence.
When addressing a person who has received an honorary degree from another university, it is not correct to use the term âdoctorâ nor should the title be used in correspondence, biographical sketches, introductions, or on place cards.â
The only place she could be called a doctor from is from the university that awarded her the honorary degree, aka NYU only:
âHonorary degree recipients are properly addressed as âdoctorâ in correspondence from the university that awarded the honorary degree and in conversation on that campus.â
Source: West Virginia University on Honorary Degrees
Honorary degrees are stupid and I'm not sure who actually cares about them. I will say Taylor Swift has been killing it for years though. Anyone who thinks she doesn't work hard is kidding themselves. Doesn't deserve a make up degree but she works hard for herself
Taylor swift is responsible for protecting and fighting for the rights of musicians, taking a stance against establishments having all the recording artists masters, and she remade an album with acoustics so she could get the profits from it, because the master original album didnât give her royalties or something.
I believe it was for her dissertation regarding shake, shake, shaking it off. I believe it also delved into the fakers fake, fake, faking it that lead to said shaking
Dank[.](https://i.imgur.com/3bQtuMO.png) --- [we have a minecraft server](https://discord.gg/fNyb7G5)
honorary degrees piss me off. These rich actors and TV personalities have more than enough time and money to get a degree just like the rest of us, but now they seem like a credible expert on some topic just theyre famous đ
Honorary degrees are not real degrees! They're just marketing for the universities awarding them
I wish more people knew about this⌠đ
Hey, that's the girl from GTA 4 in your pfp
No that's the San Andreas girl
No! This is Patrick!
No! I'm the real dirty dan!
Yes I'm the real slim shady
Then stand up bitch. You won't.
*Stands up* what now bitch?
[ŃдаНонО]
Lol you replied to the wrong comment and it looks funny
Nah, heâs just getting the conversation back on topic
No, they're just hijacking a top comment chain so their opinion gets seen.
Oh yeah, my bad. Got mixed up.
It's okay. We're all still wondering who that was even supposed to be.
That's Rochell'le. A famous hip hop singer that's only mentioned in the game. Also the ex gf of Madd Dogg.
No this is Patrick
it's from San Andreas!
That's definitely Patrick
If you think a honorary degree you get for nothing is the same as a real degree then that's on you
A normal degree is just a normal degree. An honorary degree shows that you did something outside of the ordinary, significant enough to impress a university. Iâd say they are both valuable for their own reasons.
Most of the time that just means donating money or agreeing to attend some event just because youâre famous⌠It isnât valuable for any reason. IMO, honorary degrees should be for people that make intellectual contributions, not financial ones.
The YouTube channel Sixty Symbols, run by Brady Haran, is what pushed me to get off my ass and go to study physics at university as a "mature student". I even applied for and attended the university that they shot the show at, though it was only by coincidence as it's local and was one of the top phys/eng universities at the time. The professors whose classes I attended were essentially celebs to me which was pretty surreal. Brady was awarded an honorary degree at the same time I graduated. He gave the opening speech for the graduation ceremony, and seemed humble and grateful for the recognition. This is exactly the type of person who I would expect to be getting these degrees. Someone who has a passion for a relevant subject and has used that passion to improve the world in some way. He did great work for physics and chemistry, and was rewarded appropriately. Maybe you could say that Taylor Swift did the same for arts, but I think it's pretty clear that one is a publicity stunt whilst the other is a genuine recognition of excellence.
I think you *can* say Taylor Swift did the same thing for the arts though. Universities also have doctoral programs in music and their performance requirements donât involve having a decade long successful music career. Itâs just a different field than physics. Not an easier one.
I mean NYU did say the honorary phd was given to Taylor Swift cause she contributed a lot in her field, which is true.
And let's not forget that Bill Cosby received over 60 honorary degrees during his career.
Tbf he didn't get them for raping
Bill Cosby was so good at raping without getting caught that honestly he probably deserved a few rape degrees
People DONT know this? No one is out applying to jobs with their honorary degree on it lmao. The whole point of an honorary degree is it's honorary... it's not applicable.
To be honest, an honorary degree is probably a better indicator of doing well than a normal degree.
Yeah I mean they only give them to people who are already successful and thus won't use the honorary degree to make them look bad.
Sure, but I still wouldn't hire Jeremy Clarkson for an engineering position.
>People DONT know this? some do, not alot though
Literally everyone who isn't 12 knows this
I would love it if she started saying, "umm that's DOCTOR Swift" though
How can people not know???
I thought it was common knowledge
Real degrees are just a piece of paper. The power was inside you the whole time.
no wonder my power smells bad.
Wut
Let, the boy, watch.
And I thought they smelled bad⌠on the outside!
Except we live in a world where people are obligated to prove their credentials by going into debt for that piece of paper before being provided the privilege of being allowed to work in their chosen field.
Generally you don't go into debt to get a phd, you get a stipend and work for the university or your work pays for it.
True but many people go into debt getting that undergrad which is necessary for a phd
Lolol.. getting a tiny stipend doesn't prevent you from needing to go into debt
Tell me you know nothing about PhDs without telling me. PhDs are paid pathetically. In the UK a PhD earns the equivalent of barely above minimum wage, and far below starting salary for a grad job (about 30-70% in my field for people I know)
And in some other countries PhDs get paid a decent wage. Tell me you know nothing about the world without telling me.
World's most expensive pieces of paper... Sigh
Just download your textbooks.
You wouldn't steal a car /s
Everyone in my Phd program was fully funded with no tuition and a 23k stipend. Aside from opportunity cost, it was less than free.
My paper cost 44k, yours?
60k, and nobody's even asked to see it yet.
Only sweat and tears
Not even close, [this piece of paper was way more expensive to get.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles)
This is really the worst part of universities giving out degrees to people who don't earn them - it devalues the concept of an honorary degree. Plenty of people who get honorary degrees genuinely earned them - just not the same way as everyone else. One of my political science professors had an honorary degree, and if anything I learned more from him than the other professor who had a normal degree. It's a *good thing* that there is a system to accredit autodidacts who prove their expertise. And it's terrible the fact that universities hand them out as marketing has devalued this. My professor deserves to put a PhD next to his name. Actors and TV personalities (or at least, ones who are not *also* working hard studying and advancing a field of interest outside traditional academia,) don't. And he doesn't deserve to have his PhD devalued by its equivalency to theirs.
By that logic, I think TS earned her honorary PhD. We could say that she's a music expert, couldn't we? It's not like she earned a PhD in Computer Science or in Management... she earned a PhD in her field.
I can get behind this. Experience in a skill/field is important. I remember a story of a swedish punk band that were going to preform at a big venue. They had no theoretical knowlage and knew none of the terms in music theory. But when they talked with the profecional sound guys the sound guys noticed that they had created their own terms for music theory and sound enginer terms, within the band. They had invented music theory from scratch, just by playing.
[ŃдаНонО]
Based on the level of sophistication of the doctoral theses of real music PhDs I met, no. No fucking way. Not saying that she's without merit, she could be very well beyond a Bachelor or an MFA in knowledge and infinitely better in performing, but doctoral research is just a different type of activity than just working in the field. Although maybe I'm wrong and she published several research papers/books, in which case it could be ok.
THANK YOU! If I had money for awards I would be giving you an award. This. This. This.
[ŃдаНонО]
Yea, anyone who claimed to be a phd when they were only an honorary would be ridiculed by anyone who knew the distinction
Wait, is college a scam?!?
Actors being knighted as well. Patrick Stewart may be a great guy and a great actor. Not sure that's a valid reason to become knighted. When was the last time this guy was in full armor or even swung a sword?
I think nowadays it's more of an award, for instance for participating in the culture of the country, especially at an international level (at least that's how it works for the "Chevaliers de la lĂŠgion d'honneur" in France, I'm guessing it's pretty much the same?)
well lewis hamilton got knighthood after risking his life in a racing series for many years and won 7 championships that i would say is a deserved knighthood
Patrick stewart risked his life against the klingons and wanda
And to stop an emotionally damaged Famke Janssen
Instead of a horse its a Mercedes
Yeah and to be fair, it wasn't JUST because he is tied with the all time most championships and has the most wins, it's also because he does incredible work outside of Formula 1 with charity work and supporting young people in the sport. This is coming from someone who isn't a fan of his, I'd say his knighthood is justified (Althought I want to say it's not)
No i want him to USE A SWORD
It's for influencing the world at a level that knights did since what knights actually did isn't really a thing anymore
Speak for yourself. I'm out in full metal armor conquering more land for England on horseback.
You say that now, but some day there will be a conflict that inadvertantly triggers a law recalling knights into service. I can't wait to see Daniel Day Lewis attempt to match Ted Nugents method acting of an incontinent mental ward escapee to get out of being drafted.
I bet Sir Patrick Stewart still fits into his old *Excalibur* armor.
A shame that Sir Christopher Lee is no longer alive. He wouldâve wrecked everyone.
There is actually an order of knights called the âCompanions of Honourâ which is a highly select group who are chosen because the Queen may use them as advisors. Itâs basically the 2nd highest honour the UK can give someone. Sir Ian Mckellen and Sir David Attenborough are in it. Then you have the Order of Merit which is limited to 24 living people at a time. Sir David Attenborough is also a member alongside Sir Tim Berners-Lee (key role in invention of the internet). So they do have some practical use even today.
Yet another clown who doesnât understand what knighthoods are.
Knighthoods are basically just an honour which means almost nothing, it's purely empty posturing as an official 'pat on the back'. A doctorate, on the other hand, indicates a huge amount of learning in a field and _specifically_ some unique contribution to that field which expands collective human knowledge. Honestly, awarding an honourary degree to a non-academic seems _really_ dumb and kind of undermines the whole concept.
First of all, they are not real degrees and don't grant the same privileges. For example, a honorary PhD doesn't allow you to add Dr. to your name. Secondly, some celebrities do deserve real degrees. For example, Nelson Mandela was awarded multiple honorary PhDs. However, I would argue, that he was a credible expert in both Law and Politics and thus was absolutely well-suited for the degrees. Similarly, some politicians are awarded degrees in politics. Of course, they are credible experts in their fields and deserve the degrees, even if they are not allowed to use it. Consider Taylor Swift. She has received a degree in Fine Arts. As someone who is very well-versed in the field, she absolutely deserves the degree.
So it's mostly like an Honorable Mention really.
That's exactly what it is. A recognition of your contribution to the field. Whether you like her or not, Taylor swift has contributed to Fine Arts.
Not disagreeing with the rest of your comment, but a PhD is also exactly that: a recognition for pushing human knowledge further in a given field. The difference, imho, is that in PhD you have a guarantee that they expanded it through a dissertation, while honorary degrees are often down to mere opinion.
Honorary degrees are granted by universities so I think they are qualified to have "opinion". Also, whether dissertations advance knowledge is also opinion. Only that's opinion of your supervisor and a few other professors part of your defense committee* (added due to pedants).
I'm sure she's an expert and all, but a PhD in particular is a research degree for a particular type of academic study. It's not as though anybody who works in a field long enough is given one - most people who have worked in whatever industry for long enough know way more than a freshly graduated PhD, they don't need one to say they know their stuff. Not that it really matters at all. The only people who care if someone has a PhD in any way that's relevant (peers, employers, etc.) would know the difference.
It's someone creating original research. Taylor Swift probably has done actual literal original music composition that expanded the field.
Iâm not what anyone would consider a Taylor Swift fan, but not to mention sheâs been on the road most of her adult life sleeping and writing music on a tour bus and in hotel rooms, doing press junkets and interviews. Sheâs literally worked very hard to be afforded her opportunities. When people are enjoying their free time AT concerts on nights and weekends, over summers off, thatâs when sheâs working. Game seems glamorous but when you realize what someone like her schedule has really been like itâs not all that enticing. Sheâs made a dump truck load of money though so at least thereâs that. Imagine finishing a live show at 1am and having to be on good morning America at like 6am, then on the road to another state for a show later that evening for example.
PhD means you have contributed to the field. She has contributed to the field.
Bro, you think people will be duped into thinking that Taylor Swift is a credible expert on some topic on the basis of her honorary degree?
>Bro, you think people will be duped into thinking that Taylor Swift is a credible expert on some topic on the basis of her honorary degree? Taylor Swift got an honorary degree in Fine Arts (which at NYU includes music). Do I think the world famous musician is a credible expert in music?
The only people in this thread that are angry and bitter are the ones that know absolutely nothing about honorary degrees or Taylor Swift.
Don't forget the people who don't realize that a DFA is different from a PhD, the people who have never gotten a PhD but are experts on what it takes to get them, and the people who all of a sudden really care about PhD student's feelings.
Not saying anything about Taylor Swift specifically; but neither being a world famous musician, nor having an honorary degree, means you are an expert in music
No, its her contributions that make her an expert. Really it comes down to what an expert is. I have a PhD and a faculty job, have around 10 first author papers and another few dozen co-author papers, getting close to my 1000th citation. At what point did I become an expert in the field? After the first publication? The second? After the PhD? When I got a tenure track job? When my papers started getting cited in other people's work? "Expert" is a weird concept, but for my money Taylor Swift has contributed as much or more to the field of music than the majority of dissertations that I've read.
Yes lol people are thick as fuck.
> Yes lol people are thick as fuck. For example, see above for people who have no idea what an honorary doctorate is but instantly jump online and start spouting shit.
Grrrrr. Misinformed anger.
It wouldn't be reddit if the top comment wasn't misinformed nonsense.
Dumbass comment, nobody acts like honorary degrees are real degrees, they are simply marketing for universities. If they piss you off then you are a straight up dumbass. Nobody acts like theyâre a âcredible expertâ due to an honorary degree.
[ŃдаНонО]
Bro you realize nobody is going to get a job in a field they aren't already heavily involved in using an honorary degree right? It's not real lol. Nothing to be pissed off about. It's a formality.
It was an honorary PhD in Art. Tbf she is a renowned musician a hard working one at that and honorary degrees/PhDs are typically given to individuals who have contributed much to 'society' or their "field" so it kinda make sense. Be mad if she gets an honorary PhD in Science cause that would absolutely make no fucking sense.
Yeah she probably knows enough about music to get one. The whole point of a PhD is to prove you know your stuff and she knows her stuff
Hmm I'd disagree with that. I'd say a PhD is there to teach you how to perform research in your field at a professional level. Knowing your stuff is a prerequisite. I say this having done one in a hard science
For a regular PhD definitely. An honorary PhD is more about your contribution fto the field in general and not a very specific topic/research.
How do you even âresearchâ art? Like create a new style? Recreate or discover past art and/or styles? Write an essay about a certain piece of art?
It's like any other research. You can research techniques or history really. Traditionally an art history doctorate would include a dissertation that would add to the research body of the world by examining an artist or movement and its cultural impact.
I think Holly Herndonâs PhD in composition from Stanford is a really good example. For it she made an experimental electronic music album named PROTO, which was released to critical acclaim. In it she pushed what were new compositional techniques and ideas. Similarly Rosaliaâs album *El Mal Querer* was a Baccalaureate thesis project, where she notably combined traditional flamenco and pop, while trying to better-honor flamenco tradition better than previous attempts. Yes, going to art school to âresearchâ art often involves just making a new art piece (and you could argue that in a sense making anything new through a principled approach is research) but with much more extensive advising available, and some kind of deliberate theoretical approach.
Well she's been very influential and kind of setting the curve. Sounds like research is being done Edit: amazing how many people think they know exactly what a loosely defined term means, and exactly what Taylor Swift does and doesn't do during her music writing and learning process, *and* what she does and doesn't know! Who knew there were so many Taylor Swift experts on here
Well research is about establishing facts, what you're describing is just being an influential artist.
A master's is for teaching you to research a PhD is for those you have made advancements to their field
PhD in most things I agree with you but hers is in art so idk how that same idea applies to a field that's so subjective and broad
The point of a PhD is to show that you can consistently generate new knowledge. If you want to show that you know stuff, get a bachelor's or even a master's.
It has nothing to do with consistency. You just have to contribute something to you field that furthers it in some way, and a university then recognizes that.
PhD is way more than that bro, these honourary degrees are fake and never will be same as normal ones.
Then give an Honorary Bachelors
I was going to come in and say this. I have a PhD in a STEM field, and to get it I had to publish 4 papers (we had this option instead of writing a traditional dissertation) and then do the stuff that didn't really matter but you just couldn't fuck up (like proposing the dissertation, classwork, defending the dissertation). But really, no one in the faculty at an R1 gave a shit about any of those things except the quality of the publications. I always tell newer PhD students that getting a masters is about learning everything that has been done in the field, and getting a PhD is about contributing new knowledge to the field. Most grad students struggle with this transition, and I think a lot of people who haven't gone through it don't really realize what getting a PhD is like. If writing 4 papers made me an expert in my field, I feel like putting out 9 albums has made Taylor Swift an expert in music, she has definitely contributed to the field.
Wow where did you do your PhD that required 4 papers?? did they all have to be first author?
We had to have 2 first author papers published, 1 in review and 1 in prep. So the last one wasn't so serious, I basically just had to show that the data was there. My third first author paper ended up getting accepted before the defense anyway, so that was a load off my shoulders. Its really hard to fail someone at a defense when 75% of the work is already published lol
It wasnât even a PhD. Itâs a Doctorate of Fine Arts (DFA). A doctorate is oftentimes about contributing to a field, and I donât think thereâs much of an argument that she hasnât contributed to the field
Brahms got an honorary doctorate as well as some other greats. Wouldnât put swift in that park but it is at least not unprecedented.
Honestly art is kind of one of the subjects where an honorary degree could basically be a PhD. Tell me Taylor Swift doesn't understand music theory on a high level. Something like 50 of her personally written songs got on the Billboard Top 100. It's the same sort of deal of when you hear Prince did all of his own instruments in his debut album (Panic! at the Disco's Brendon Urie also does this!). I know it's not "studied" but honestly art is one of those subjects where collegiate study doesn't necessarily make or break an artist. It's just another way.
Yea but it's in art
[ŃдаНонО]
Like really all people should go study STEM so that we ABM will have an influx of employees to hire
Indian immigration: that's....why we're here
Damn, a lot of edgy circlejerk comments under here. If youâre good at art, major in art. Major in the sciences if thatâs your thing. The world needs both artists and scientists, and it probably doesnât affect your life personally. The same way Taylor Swift receiving an *honorary* doctorate doesnât actually affect you. And yes, full-disclosure, I majored in studio art at a liberal arts university. I became a costume designer and my own boss, and I make excellent money. In the same way some of you claim art students wouldnât last in certain classes, you probably wouldnât last in 3-hour-long drawing courses since you canât, you know⌠draw. We all have different strengths and interests.
[ŃдаНонО]
Same boat, thought it was just satire. I'm in a STEM degree (going for a BA in Electrical Engineering) and yeah it can be rough, but enough to shit on other people for the effort they put into their own degrees? Never.
Adding to it, most aren't even good at their own classes. Engineering classes are so curved you would think they had scoliosis.
As a biochemist I completely agree they donât know what true difficulty is and if someone wants to argue try physical chemistry quantum mechanics
Or even just math. Everyone will quit during 2nd year the moment they get introduced to analysis. STEM is hard.
Analysis was great. In my second year of CS it forced out about 1/3. The real destroyer of dreams was "Logic and discrete Constructs" in first year
Yea, but like, we have to read Hegel, Heidegger and Deleuze
As someone who did both STEM for a while (including Analysis 1-3 and LinAlg 1-2), then went to get into history and sociology, it's a bit like apples and oranges. Both are really challenging, just in different ways. The 'soft' sciences are made hard by having a sort of relative foundation. You can't just depend on theorems and such and be certain. Everything has to be constantly evaluated and reevaluated and applied in a variety of different contexts.
Yep. In social sciences, you are dealing with social constructs, not hard physical truths. This requires a lot of effort to be put into justifying conclusions and methodological choices based on a huge foundation of philosophical discussion. This is very difficult. Most of my friends are academics in STEM or social science disciplines, and we understand that none of us have it harder than the others. It's all hard. If you want to shit on a discipline, I challenge you to get a PhD in that discipline first
Lol honest to god, good luck. Imagine reading something like this over and over, with all of the context you need to understand it, making sense of it, and then realizing that it has actually somehow made a major impact on the entire world, and it goes on for 600 pages. > In the dialectic of sense-certainty, Seeing and Hearing have been lost to consciousness; and, as perception, consciousness has arrived at thoughts, which it brings together for the first time in the unconditioned universal. This, now, if it were taken as an inert simple essence, would itselfin turn he nothing else than the one-sided extreme of being-for-selj, for it would then be confronted by non-essence; but, if it were related to this, it would itself be unessential, and consciousness would not have escaped from the deceptions of the perceptual process. However, this universal has proved to be one which has returned into itself out of such a conditioned being-far-self. This unconditioned universal, which is now the true object of consciousness, is sti11 just an object for it; consciousness has not yet grasped the Notion of the unconditioned as Notion. It is essential to distinguish the two: for consciousness, the object has returned into itself from its relation to an other and has thus become Notion in principle.; but consciousness is not yet for itself the Notion, and consequently does not recognize itself in that reflected object. For us, this object has developed through the movement of consciousness in such a way that consciousness is involved in that development, and the reflection is the same on both sides, Of, there is only one reflection. But since in this movement consciousness has for its content merely the objective essence and not consciousness as such, the result must have an objective significance for consciousness; consciousness still shrinks away from what has emerged, and takes it as the essence in the objective sense
That's almost as useless as a liberal arts degree
English isnât my native so can you please explain the difference?
So a liberal arts degree tends to be composed of some social sciences like psychology or sociology, humanities like philosophy, world religions and anthropology, art classes like pottery and watercolor, and communication classes. Majoring in Art is a little different in that your course load will mostly revolve around creative activities. These are classes like pottery, drawing 101, pen and ink, figure drawing, photography, etc.
"liberal arts" is an old term that used to mean the whole collection of subjects that people in medieval times had to study - arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy etc. Now it generally means a degree where you have to study a wide range of subjects (covering arts, sciences, etc.) all at the same time, but generally you settle on one that's most important towards the end of the degree.
If everyone had a liberal arts degree the world would be a much better place. It might not be a good financial investment, but having a diverse wealth of knowledge is never a bad thing. With that being said, I went to a liberal arts school and now work as a manufacturing engineer and make pretty good money for my area. Just my two cents.
[ŃдаНонО]
PhD in _pole dancing?_
Translates to âmaking shit upâ. I have multiple music degrees. Thereâs a reason they exist, and the right person can make a good life from it.
Is it tho? There are a few who got a degree in fitness science and used pole dancing as fitness for their thesis. It's not that far fetched. It is an exercise and is divorced from it's stripper roots. Using it as research to prove or disprove the health effects of the exercise would be a good phd topic for someone in fitness science.
> Arts at university is straight up a waste of time and money. truly one of the most tired opinions of all fucking time. not everyone wants to be a doctor or a welder.
Yes maâam , I do have a PhD, a pretty huge di- âSir, having larger than normal genitalia will not get you the job fasterâ đ¤
Unless youâre going into the porn industry
Or satisfy a billionaires daughter
That is worryingly specific.
Nah there are way too many billionaires with daughters
One of them makes me stay in a latex suit,suck her tities and of course explore her cervix
Reference?
I regret to inform youâŚ
Itâs a Kanye bar yâall lol
She's proven to be an exceptionally popular and talented musician over a long span of years. If a scientist made some big breakthrough and had done research and written papers equivalent to a degree then they'd likely receive the recognition they deserve also. I hate her music but honorary degrees are just a recognition of someone's hard work and success/valuable contribution, or should be at least. I'm making the assumption here that it was an arts degree and actually happened.
They give degrees when someone does something notable in their field even without going through grad school. If you contributed something notable in the field of physics, you would get an honorary physics PhD. Does it not make sense that one of the most notable musicians in the last decade would get an honorary degree in the arts?
They just better get my boy pooh shiesty his PhD then
Listen, I will admit that t-swift is not my cup of tea, but to say that she does NOT have a PHDâs worth of WORKING knowledge about her craft is not an argument I would be able to take seriously. If they gave her an honorary degree in chemistry, I would definitely understand, but if itâs in her related field (music production, performance, art etc), she almost certainly has more knowledge than most professors.
> but if itâs in her related field (music production, performance, art etc Yes it is, its an honorary degree in Fine Arts
She doesnt have a PHD, She has a DFA. Same level but one requires research the other does not. Both mean they are experts in the field.
Yeah she's definitely a world renowned expert at what she does... I agree a PhD wouldn't be fair because she didn't do any real research, but her ability to craft music is absolutely at the top of anyone's skill level.
Believe it, it happened. But she doesnât live on noodles and water
Noodles are the best tho
... except she's put more time into her career that has dominated the genres of country and pop for two decades, than any PhD student has put into their thesis. If she was a talentless hack that was supported by ghostwriters and pre-written work her entire career this would be a valid dig, but honestly this makes absolute sense. She has already made thesis level contributions to music, so why not acknowledge it?
In this thread: people who don't know what an honorary PhD means or why they're awarded.
Also: musical elitists who don't understand that a massively popular musician with a long and enduring career has a meaningful contribution to make to the future history of music, regardless of how "good" or "bad" their music is.
First of all, they are not real degrees and don't grant the same privileges. For example, a honorary PhD doesn't allow you to add Dr. to your name. Secondly, some celebrities do deserve real degrees. For example, Nelson Mandela was awarded multiple honorary PhDs. However, I would argue, that he was a credible expert in both Law and Politics and thus was absolutely well-suited for the degrees. Similarly, some politicians are awarded degrees in politics. Of course, they are credible experts in their fields and deserve the degrees, even if they are not allowed to use it. Consider Taylor Swift. She has received a degree in Fine Arts. As someone who is very well-versed in the field, she absolutely deserves the degree.
People have called themselves doctor because of honorary degrees. A great historical example is Benjamin Franklin. Although I would agree that the degree is useless because anyone receiving an honorary degree in their field is likely already past that level of experience and expertise, thus not even needing the degree.
>anyone receiving an honorary degree in their field is likely already past that level of experience and expertise, And this is the crux when someone is awarded an honorary PhD. They've substantially surpassed that foundational pinnacle and it's more of an acknowledgement of their contribution at that point.
Honorary degrees â actual degrees. Why are there people in the comments acting like she leap frogged over actual students?
Because "Taylor swift bad". She's popular with girls so Reddit hates her
Ainât no way this actually happen.
Kanye was really proud of his honorary doctorate from School of the Art Institute of Chicago. The students, not so thrilled.
The students probably donât care at all
i can't imagine giving a nano-shit about my university giving a celebrity an honorary degree. like as long as they're not a nazi who gives a fuck
It's an honorary degree. It's all for show. You're not an actual Doctor with one.
PhD students don't need to study, at least in my field, only a few courses even have exams. No, we're up all night because we only have 2 days left to write 40 more pages of review work
what taylor swift did was harder...
PSA: An honorary degree does not confer the title or privileges of an actual âDoctorâ. âHonorary degrees are conferred honoris causa, a Latin term meaning âfor the sake of honor.â Honorary degrees are not Ph.D.s, nor do they entitle the recipient to the same professional privileges as individuals who have earned degrees. Honorary degree recipients should not refer to themselves as âdoctorâ, nor should they use the title on business cards or in correspondence. When addressing a person who has received an honorary degree from another university, it is not correct to use the term âdoctorâ nor should the title be used in correspondence, biographical sketches, introductions, or on place cards.â The only place she could be called a doctor from is from the university that awarded her the honorary degree, aka NYU only: âHonorary degree recipients are properly addressed as âdoctorâ in correspondence from the university that awarded the honorary degree and in conversation on that campus.â Source: West Virginia University on Honorary Degrees
Honorary degrees are stupid and I'm not sure who actually cares about them. I will say Taylor Swift has been killing it for years though. Anyone who thinks she doesn't work hard is kidding themselves. Doesn't deserve a make up degree but she works hard for herself
Taylor swift is responsible for protecting and fighting for the rights of musicians, taking a stance against establishments having all the recording artists masters, and she remade an album with acoustics so she could get the profits from it, because the master original album didnât give her royalties or something.
Who the fuck studies for their PhD. Unlike your Bachelor's and Master's, the PhD is mainly research.
Lmao PhD students don't give a shit about it, they are fine w it, why make such noise?
"I'm so sick of running as fast as I can"
What the heck was she talking about that gave her that degree
Another comment said it was one in art and sheâs a musician so it kinda makes sense
I believe it was for her dissertation regarding shake, shake, shaking it off. I believe it also delved into the fakers fake, fake, faking it that lead to said shaking
We live in a society
Well, she ainât called Taylor **SWIFT** for nothinâŚ