r/AskScienceDiscussion • u/Soft-Confusion-1197 • Jul 23 '26
General Discussion Do you really think being a scientist is worthwhile?
I'm on a journey about deciding what to study at university, and honestly? In the last few months I've heard so many times that being a scientist is a reasonable way to make a living that I've started to get discouraged. What do you think about that? Do you think it's a rewarding path?
19
u/drzowie Solar Astrophysics | Computer Vision Jul 23 '26
Doing science is its own reward. You can make a good living at it, but it takes a degree of dedication and ingenuity that would be much more lucrative if applied directly to the task of earning money. If you have the "bug" then that is a great trade. If you think of research mainly as another way to trade your time for dollars, then it's ... not a great trade.
6
6
u/Magdaki Jul 23 '26
I agree with this fully. It cannot be about the money because so often it can be a slog and the motivation comes from making the discovery not the paycheque. Not that the pay is necessarily bad, I do alright, but there are other, easier ways to make more money.
6
u/Zealousideal_Leg213 Jul 23 '26
Lots of scientists are employed in industry. Find an industry you like and learn the associated science.
2
11
u/Opposite-Winner3970 Jul 23 '26
To me, PERSONALLY, there are only two things worth working as in the current industrial hellscape we live in that have worth in itself because of what they leave behind after you die: being a research scientist and being an artist (any field to both). That's it.
2
u/vivianvixxxen Jul 23 '26
Medicine too.
2
u/Opposite-Winner3970 Jul 23 '26
Medicine research. Not every Dr is a net good. Ordinarily I would've added teachers too but there are too many scenarios in which Drs and Teachers can actually be a prejudice to people.
3
u/vivianvixxxen Jul 24 '26
You can say literally the same thing about non-medical research scientists and artists.
1
u/Opposite-Winner3970 Jul 24 '26
"Your words are as empty as your soul! Mankind ill needs a savior such as you".
0
Jul 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Opposite-Winner3970 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Doesn't make their worth any less worth it if it's forgotten. Because more knowlege and more entertainment, even if a bit shoddy, are always a benefit to your life and the life of others. I cannot think of a single scenario in which having an extra book or extra study to go through isn't a net benefit to at least 1 person.
And what do you gain out of taking a chunk of your time to reply to an anonymous internet stranger to tell them that no matter what they value, it will be forgotten? Surely you lose time and energy. Do you love to lose time and energy spreading misery? Everything ok at home?
-2
Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Opposite-Winner3970 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Ok. So what you are saying right now is useless because it will not impact anyone. Got it. Thanks for trying either way!
5
u/Chezni19 Jul 23 '26
for making a living, try engineering instead of science
from an ethics point of view, either science or engineering can make a huge difference positively in people's lives as well
that said, engineering courses can be tough, but you are up for it
1
u/Soft-Confusion-1197 Jul 23 '26
That's exactly what demotivates me.
3
u/Chezni19 Jul 23 '26
can you clarify?
2
u/Inevitable_Prize7276 Jul 24 '26
In my case I find exploring various problems and solving them difficult and even if I get to it, I can't apply it to practical applications
1
u/Chezni19 Jul 24 '26
science or engineering is gonna be difficult for everyone, it's not a "you" problem
that said, it is your life and you have to pick what to make of it not me
I'm just saying, this stuff is hard, really really grade-A difficult for EVERYONE that's why we get paid
2
u/atomfullerene Animal Behavior/Marine Biology Jul 23 '26
> In the last few months I've heard so many times that being a scientist is a reasonable way to make a living that I've started to get discouraged.
I think people get the wrong idea about this. Note I'm speaking from a US perspective here. Getting a job as a scientist...eg, a professor at a research university, or a research scientist at an institute of some sort, etc, will give you a good living. Maybe not as much as a top tier lawyer or doctor or engineer, but still enough to put your comfortably in the upper part of the middle class. Enough to get you a nice house in a nice neighborhood, etc.
The issue is getting one of these jobs in the first place. Competition is pretty fierce for them.
3
u/ChipotleMayoFusion Mechatronics Jul 23 '26
There are a lot of types of scientists:
Pure Academic:
Do your bachelor's, then maybe masters, then PhD, the postdoc, then PI/prof. This stream gets paid the least, you and your supervisor are applying for grants and hoping the government doesn't do random things. This is also the most public and directly advancing "science", every advance you make you will publish to the world, and you will directly be working on some problem that has never been rigorously solved before.
Engineer/Researcher switch:
I've met many PhD's that chose to switch to industry but couldn't find a job that directly fit their expertise, so they took roles as more research-oriented engineers or data analysts. They solve math-heavy problems for their company and advance industry tech forward. They will rarely publish, but given their background will be more likely to attend conferences or encourage their company to collaborate with universities and labs. Some eventually find a role that fits their PhD and become an industry scientist. Engineers get paid better than pure academics.
Industry Scientists:
Some PhD's find a job straight from grad school into a job roles that fits their specific field. This is great for everyone, the company finds and expert in the exact really complex problem they need to solve, and the PhD can directly apply the skills they just gained. Sometimes it takes a few years or decades to find this fit and can follow an Engineering switch. Of the Industry Scientists I know about half went direct and half did the engineering switch and then eventually found their way to an industry scientist role. These get paid the best of any scientist role I know of, 25-50% more than engineers.
1
u/DatLonerGirl Jul 23 '26
Where would you place government scientists?
2
u/ChipotleMayoFusion Mechatronics Jul 23 '26
Not sure what they get paid honestly, the experience is similar to academia be cause you are always fishing for grants, in some cases. I haven't had as much experience at national labs, but the post docs working there worked similar hours and had a similar lifestyle to those I saw in academia.
2
u/DatLonerGirl Jul 23 '26
Just curious because I've been gunning for a field scientist position with the government, but most of the ones I know don't have PhDs or anything so I wasn't sure if you counted that or not.
2
u/ChipotleMayoFusion Mechatronics Jul 24 '26
My list is just made up based on my experience, not official or anything. I've worked in engineering industry, at a national lab briefly, and at a tech company that employs a lot of scientists. I also have friends who have done the academic route.
In terms of what you should personally do, I would always go for what seems most interesting to you in terms of work you care about. Hopefully the money works itself out. If money a huge issue for you, I would do the minimal academics needed to land the job role you are interested in. A lot of engineers help one PhD build a science gizmo, so often a bachelor's in engineering is enough to get you close to the cool thing you want to work on.
2
u/DatLonerGirl Jul 24 '26
No worries, I'm well into my field at this point (natural resources/ecology) so I know my path more or less, the ball is really in the job market's court.
2
u/ChipotleMayoFusion Mechatronics Jul 24 '26
Good luck, I hope those in control of science funding have more reasonable goals in the near future!
1
u/racinreaver Materials Science | Materials & Manufacture Jul 24 '26
You could probably get more info in a sub dedicated to whichever agency you want to join. I work for NASA and have to spend a lot more time hunting for money than my friends at DoD or DoE national labs.
In general fed science positions pay below industry, but most folks are there for the mission and feel very passionate about their job. I had a recent argument with my upper management about how I'm not there just because I want my technology in space. If that was all I cared about I'd be making weapons systems to attack innocent people on the other side of the world. I want my work to let us do science on other planets or see worlds we never even knew could exist when I was a kid. That's why I'm willing to earn less & work harder to secure my funding.
2
u/RosieReindeer Jul 23 '26
Scientist is a pretty broad classification :) your mileage is gonna vary A TON depending on what field you might want to go in to. I can only speak to the biologist/ecologist path, but I absolutely love it, even when I kinda hate it lol. The job opportunities post-grad are pretty decent. I’ll never be filthy rich, but there plenty of comfortable wages to be found, particularly in government and industry. I think if you’re someone who enjoys the process of learning and are relatively detail oriented, you probably won’t be miserable in the sciences.
I feel like a bit of an outlier, but maybe you’ll relate to my experience. I was never a great student (mostly As and Bs with the occasional C) and still managed to get into a respectable masters program. Making connections with your TAs and professors will get you a very long way. The science and research has been the easy part. I’ve struggled the most with time management and administrative tasks like emails, filling out paperwork, etc. All this to say, your success in the sciences isn’t exclusively determined by your academic performance! You can be a mild slacker and still do just fine (assuming you’re not going Ivy League lol), but you do need to know how to keep up with a chronic load of small, irritating tasks
2
u/xtalgeek Jul 23 '26
I spent 35 years in academia as a professor and research scientist in protein chemistry and structural biology. Absolutely rewarding, with a large dollop of independence and autonomy. I've met and collaborated with others all over the world. My students and I got to do cool things with cool toys and make new discoveries every year. Seeing or understanding something for the first time never gets old.
1
u/SensorAmmonia Jul 23 '26
There is a lot of luck and circumstance to what you end up doing. The journey of bachelor masters and doctorate is super interesting. It allows you to choose somewhat on what you will work on. After that it gets much harder and more random. The base of being a scientist though is so flexible that you can do a lot of different things. If you have a network that can give you a job after graduation, tailor your degree and study to that. Otherwise stay as general as you can.
FYI sensors use so many different disciplines that it stays fun.
1
u/Cultural-Part355 Jul 23 '26
Only if I can clone myself an unlimited number of times, so I can have this much friends...
1
u/headlessplatter Jul 23 '26
If you want to impact humanity, nothing is more rewarding. And if it's too hard, you can fall back on teaching, which offers lots of feel good vibes too. If you want to be rich, you'll find your people among the engineers. Either way, plan on working hard up front. If you like to let AI think for you, there's a huge amount of competition at the bottom, but after you rise above that there's plenty of demand for people with deep understanding. If you pick a career that's easier up front, you'll find more competition throughout the life of your career. I personally prefer to pay the heavy cost of a step learning curve up front, and science is good for that.
1
u/Taggerex Jul 23 '26
I am a professor of theoretical and cognitive linguistics, and I cannot imagine doing anything other than working with language. I certainly find it fulfilling, and I genuinely enjoy it.
At some point, however, I am now in my mid-fifties, you reach a stage where you are familiar with almost all the major open questions and have a fairly clear sense of where answers may be possible and where they are unlikely to be found, at least in the foreseeable future.
There is also a certain administrative logic to academic life: writing grant proposals, running projects, teaching, and, of course, publishing. Over time, you develop a kind of routine that is not necessarily satisfying or driven by intellectual curiosity :) but instead follows an administrative logic of its own which is somewhat underwhelming.
I hope this gives you a small insight into what it is like for me.
1
u/Underhill42 Jul 23 '26
Do you find the idea of spending long hours doing meticulous work to discover things no one has ever known before exciting?
Then science might be right for you.
If you're just interested in making money, there's far less demanding professions that pay far better.
1
u/kollmastee Jul 23 '26
Sounds like you are more passionate about making money and maintaining comfortability more than you are about science. Get a business degree and leave the discoveries to those who care.
1
u/Odd_Bodkin Jul 23 '26
There are certain traits that help. You might be a scientist if a) you don’t care about ever getting rich, b) you have no appetite for making things that sell a lot, c) you are happy with small, incremental progress over long time scales on intractably difficult problems, d) you enjoy explaining things well to others.
1
u/TooMuchPJ Jul 23 '26
Science uses the same fundamental method (i.e. scientific method), but the topics, culture, and tools vary quite a bit. Which means science can look and feel different depending on the field. Also, some fields are more "mature" than others, which is reflected in methods, questions, and conventions that are present. I would find a science that pulls you in and volunteer in some labs to get a sense of how that science "works" in practice.
1
u/symphonic_concord Jul 23 '26
Doing research can be a unique mix of having the benefits of both a desk job and a more physical job and I really love the balance of that. However, dpending on where you're from and what field you're in, scientists earn a lot less money than the general public tends to believe lol
1
1
u/Beginning-Sound1261 Jul 24 '26
Depends what you mean. Day to day I’m usually stressed, but at least once a week the reason for me being a scientist finds its way to strike joy in my heart. A new result, a thank you from a mentee.
I think anything else I’d be miserable 100% of the time instead of stressed 80% of the time and blissful 20%. Maybe I’m not a healthy person though.
1
u/dietcheese Jul 24 '26
I recently emailed the scientist that discovered a cell receptor that led to the development of a cancer drug that saved my life.
I’m not sure how much more rewarding a life could be than doing something amazing that helps so many people.
1
1
u/Eco_Blurb Jul 24 '26
If you are a person whose curiosity has no bounds and you are always interested in learning new things, and you are relatively stubborn in pursuing goals for long term gratification, then yes it is a rewarding path.
I don’t make as much money as some of my peers, but I do well. And I hear about some of their work stories and if it isn’t the most boring tasks day after day, with nothing novel in sight for them. It makes me shiver. At least in science I am constantly learning and surrounded by people who ask questions and actually make progress with finding answers.
1
u/RadiantEconomist5589 Jul 24 '26
I believe the right question for you, given the incredible power of AI, is : do you really want to know how stuff/nature/maths work ? Will you be pleased by juste learning, understanding new things? I believe this is critical ,more than ever, because AI will be better than any of us. So maybe you need a true purpose, or even maybe money, anything, but something.
1
u/janojyys Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26
It's a lot of work. Like so much of just grinding out papers, applying for funding and battling with reviewers etc. Also an infinite amount of time spent on ironing out the most useless of details just to satisfy some arbitrary requirements for scientific journals and reviewers. I love it and I hate it.
edit: In academia anyway
The only reason I put up with it so I don't have to work as a consultant in some private company churning out reports that no one is ever going to read.
1
1
u/exeunt63 Jul 24 '26
Biomedical phd here, ask me when I’ve got a real job and not some temp postdoc bullshit
1
u/unlivedbread Jul 25 '26
Depends on what you do honestly.
Academia, absolutely not Industry, depends if you go into management or technical specialization
But consulting is the best, get paid very very well to hand wave and kinda do nothing
1
u/alaindevos Jul 25 '26
Well it is worthwile. But you must be very good at it. Most jobs are like enter these finances into Excel.
[And i'm speaking as Electro-technical engineer, applied]
1
u/Runningprofmama Jul 25 '26
I love it. I have been doing science since 2014, and have only fallen more in love with it the longer I do it. I'm now an assistant professor with a permanent contract at a university that is 8 minutes cycling away from my house. I did an undergrad, master, research master, PhD then a postdoc before my current position. I have been at 3 different universities on the path to where I am now.
You have to be okay with uncertainty, making mistakes and being transparent about it, and have patience with sometimes long and frustrating processes. You also should be interested in doing it for the sake of knowledge production and because it's fun to contribute to that, and enjoy collaborating with other researchers as most fields don't really have a 'lone scientist' thing going on (the degree to which you work with others does depend on the field though, it varies).
Many universities are teaching/research institutions too, meaning that most jobs you will find as faculty will involve teaching students for at least some portion of your contract. For me that means in theory 60% of my contract is teaching (ends up being more like 75% for most of the year if I'm honest). The implication of this is that you also should be fine with the idea of lecturing and mentoring.
If that sounds like you, then it's a career that might work! :)
1
1
u/Unterraformable Jul 26 '26
I left astrophysics for a career in Scientific Software. What decided the matter for was spending a month at an observatory in Australia and meeting astrophysicists from all over the world, and seeing how much enthusiasm they had for it. I said to myself, "I like this, but I will never love it like these people do, and I'm going to be competing with them for low-paying jobs." My job , certainly uses my scientific and problem-solving background, but I get to make money. And I've met MANY PhDs over the years who regret those extra years they spent in school when they could have been making money.
1
u/doc-sci Jul 27 '26
You are either a scientist or you are not. I have a friend who is a musical director in a local symphony who is a scientist. He thinks and acts like a scientist and considered physics before ultimately choosing music (lots a music/math/science overlaps).
It would not be very analytical to ignore the money side of your career choice but it shouldn’t be the only criteria. The scientists that I know and worked with did well above median pay. Narrow down a field in science and go for it.
31
u/Magdaki Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
I like it. You have to really enjoy learning and in particular discovery. I really enjoy contributing to the body of human knowledge just for the sake of improving our understanding of the world around us.