There is nothing to doing a PhD. All you do is sit down at your computer and bleed

© Depositphotos.com/@cookelma
What is the purpose of the critic? In high school the role isn't noticeable, one just gets that first draft over the minimum word limit and in on time and then it's done and then high school is over. When one gets to university the priority should be on protecting one's sensibilities from focused criticism. As universities exist to ratify one's preordained competence, all the rigmarole is completely unnecessary.



It is of course a commonplace that an academic possesses the serene confidence that one is a full-sized researcher and therefore need not put forth evidences of empirical observations based on sound research design, nor take into account that one's contribution to new knowledge has anything to do with seeing further by standing on the shoulders of giants. 
Isaac Newton, 1689

Only a fool would twist and turn and practise productive procrastination while trudging along the razor's edge of sanity and the other. All this is completely unnecessary because you can do it all online for free via a MOOC.

Ernest Hemingway, 1939
All one needs to do to become an expert is to pick a field then constantly browse the Net for information on the topic. There is no need for supervision and if you get stuck, simply source knowledge from the crowd. Moreover, laborious referencing is an antiquated skill which is simply not vocational. What use could proper referencing possibly have today anyway?

W. Somerset Maugham, 1934
I’d always thought that being an academic was the next best thing to being independently wealthy. And it's true. Seriously, this elitist profession has had its day. Society doesn't really need academics, and anyone can be one.