<p>
[quote]
The problem with Ibanking is that you forgot to mention MOST people will burn out in three years or less. The hours it requires to just be average in an investment banking firm is ridiculous. </p>
<p>If you had two or three Master's degrees in Engineering, you could at least have a job after the three years. In addition, because your technical knowledge is so broad as well as in depth, all you need is an MBA and you will literally OWN everyone in the company.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ha! I would argue that getting multiple master's degrees in engineering followed by an MBA is just a quick a path to burnout too. At least with the Ibanking road, you'd be making money while getting burned out. Doing what you suggest, you'd actually be PAYING money to get burned out.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you had two or three Master's degrees in Engineering, you could at least have a job after the three years. In addition, because your technical knowledge is so broad as well as in depth, all you need is an MBA and you will literally OWN everyone in the company.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm afraid I have to disagree. I've known people with both PhD's in engineering and MBA's, and still get stuck in relatively low-end jobs. They certainly don't 'own anybody' in the company. They're still taking orders from the bean-counters above them. Heck, I know some people with PhD's in engineering, went back to getting their MBA's, and who can't even get a decent management position and had to go back to being researchers. The point is, degrees by themselves guarantee you nothing. Except perhaps for cases of nepotism and other unusual circumstances, nobody can simply say for sure that all they have to do is get such-and-such a degree and they will automatically be handed such-and-such a position. It doesn't work that way. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Humanities are more subjective as well. With a humanities paper, there are literally an infinite number of possibilities of arguement.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just like Drab said, just because there are infinite arguments doesn't mean that they are all good. I'll put it to you this way. There are literally an infinite number of ways to write an humanities PhD dissertation. But that doesn't mean that you, as a PhD humanities student, can just write anything you want and simply expect your PhD advisors to approve it. Completing a humanities doctoral dissertation is one of the most gruelingly weighty tasks in the world. These things don't get approved until it reaches an extremely high standard of quality, as defined by the advisors. The vast majority of dissertations "fail" in the sense that they are sent back for more editing and revision. </p>
<p>So I ask the question for which I have never heard a satisfactory answer: if humanities profs can be this tough with the dissertations of their graduate students, why can't they be similarly tough with the grading of their undergrads?</p>