On Being a PhD Supervisor

You do indeed grasp the all important thing, the great benefit which philosophy confers, but you do not yet discern accurately its various functions, nor do you yet know how great is the help we receive from philosophy in everything, everywhere, - how, (to use Cicero's language), it not only aids us ['opituletur'] in the greatest matters but also descends to the smallest… After you have come to possess all other things, shall you then wish to possess wisdom also?  Is philosophy to be the last requisite in life, - a sort of supplement?  Nay, your plan should be this: be a philosopher now.--Seneca, Letter 17.

I am in my fourth year as PhD supervisor; my 'first' will defend in September. Because I live in Amsterdam and my job is in Ghent, I also offer much of my guidance via letters. So, I can easily identify with Seneca's hectoring. Epistolary mentorship makes PhD supervision, which is tricky even in the best circumstances, more complicated yet. The needs of the PhD student and the interests of the tax-payers, which fund their generous grants, as well as the university and department (which desire too much publication), not to mention the vanity of the supervisor are not identical. Should we focus on developing students' philosophical or professional skills; help them develop personally, focus on how to get papers past referees, or prepare them for a life-time of learning and intellectual development? Time is scarce, and the pressures – even with the most generous and gentle supervisors (as, I fear, am not) -- can be immense, especially if the aim is to succeed in an uncertain and unforgiving job-market.

Some of my PhD students suggested we read Seneca together. I eagerly embraced this idea. In some of my posts I have tried to convey the exhilaration of reading him with such smart and hungry companions. But it's strange to read his words: Philosophy as an aid (or remedy) is far removed from my daily experience in the profession. My PhD and my (lengthy) CV have not prepared me to guide young minds in navigating their daily anxieties. (I sometimes think that becoming father has been better preparation, but my 'first generation' of PhD students is not fully benefitting from this gift.) My students have no financial hardships (Flemish PhD salaries are very generous), but present ease does not seem to diminish legitimate apprehension over the future. I often sense that my PhD students do not feel enduringly free (perpetua libertas) around me. (It's hard to judge, of course, how they feel, away from me.)

I am pretty sure that my well-intentioned criticisms and suggestions have not offered remedy against their understandable worries about the future. In a few cases, I have arguably accentuated the negative by a misplaced pep-talk, when with benefit of hindsight, what was required was quiet reassurance. While I treat each of my students as individuals – I don't have a supervision-template because each has different aspirations and different skills --, I am sure that I misjudged their needs at various times. Some of that I can chalk up to beginner's mistakes (a teasing joke here, not enough encouragement there, not enough clear guidance, etc.), but some undoubtedly have to do with mismatched personalities. Leaving aside my narcissism (a kind of necessity if you are blogger), when I I am under stress or sleep-deprivation, I tend to get annoying skin allergies, which make me very irritable (which produce more stress, etc.). Such mismatch of personalities, is not such a big deal if the grant is in a student's name (then they can switch supervisors—no fun, of course, but eminently sensible in some circumstances), but the student is 'trapped with Schliesser' if the grant is in my name. (A big down-side of the system I work in.) I have no idea if any of my PhD students feels trapped, and I am smart enough not to ask them; I adore each of them.

Ever since I read Ruth Chang's remarks, a further possibility has haunted me: that my intellectual reflexes are really deformed by my professional training (recall). My PhD students' may well need me to withhold judgment, but all my 'instincts' push in a different direction: a new argument, a new objection, and not to mention all the unsolicited advice I give about how to tailor their work to referees. Seneca is oriented, in part, to the art of living and he does have lots of useful advice and emendation techniques. He is right that just doing philosophy – focusing on one's inner necessity and the questions that follow from it – is often the most viable strategy even during a PhD. But sometimes one must recognize that accurate perception is beyond one's reach and that aiming for it is the wrong course of action. Sometimes a supervisor's best decision is not to offer a new distinction or another person to read. Letting a problem rest, and keeping one's mouth shot, can be wiser philosophy. Such wisdom does not come naturally to me. It's hard to say if Seneca's magisterial role allow such silences; the epistle form does not allow such gaps and such withholding to be made visible easily; but I suspect that Seneca struggled with the issue if even the smallest (in minima) matter, matters.

Comments

[Carlotta Montagna]

I am a PhD student in Classics in London and I am very pleased to read that you are so keen on Seneca's thought. I am as well. In fact, in my thesis, I focus on Seneca's philosophical approach to moral progress. I am also glad to see that you confer so much attention upon your relationship with your students. As Seneca teaches to us, in fact, every proficiens needs a supportive magister to improve. So, I would be happy and grateful to you if I could get your feedback. May I send to you my last draft? Many thanks for your attention, Carlotta

[Eric Schliesser]

Carlotta (yes?), I would be amazed (even concerned) that a dilettante classicist like me could give you useful advice, but feel free to send me a chapter or paper that you believe would be most useful to have me comment on.

[Carlotta]

Dear prof. Schliesser, thank you very much for your prompt reply. I will be back to you soon, if you will be so kind to help me. In fact, nowadays it is necessary to widen one's academic horizons and to explore other fields, in an interdisciplinary perspective. At least, it is my research philosophy, in line with Seneca's view that all of us ultimately belong to one, holistic academy. And this academy does not know strict boundaries. Best wishes, Carlotta (right: I am Italian!)