Decision making...

I work at a research institute as a research assistant while I'm (trying to) do(ing) my dissertation at the same time. A few month ago, probably about last October or November the person responsible for "research strategies" and such stuff gave a talk where she explained our chances to "survive" in science and what other job alternatives we might have.

In her talk she had one figure where she said the chances to get a untermed job in research IF you have a Phd are less than 0.1%. Again, IF you have a Phd, I don't have one yet. (To be fair, she also said, that we have plenty of other alternatives to get jobs... but that might not be what I'm interested in. And it seemed not too convincing for me.) 

In Germany, where I live, the problem is also that you are only allowed to hold termed jobs for 12 years (6 years after the Phd), so to live on termed jobs is no real possibility either. You have to get one of the rare untermend job sooner or not too much later or you are out.

Being unemployed with nearly 40 (after those 12 years in termed jobs) might not be too much fun, especially if you don't have any other working experience outside of research/science you can build upon.

Well, so that was the information I got. And while it is not completely new, the 0.1% figure was. I don't think it is necessary really that bad, but reality might be still quite devastating. And then, if you look who are the X% who ended up getting permanent jobs, you ask yourself if you want to be like they are. At least I ask myself if I want to be like them. (Of course there are nice ppl as well. But I still think that there is a pattern, like everywhere. Of course this isn't specific to science; it's just that in other jobs you can get a untermed job more easy.)

But that is not really what I wanted to tell... The point is, that she told us, that we really, really, really need a plan B, for the case we belong to the 99.9%. (Don't ask me why the institue employs her to tell us this, bc, when we all would focus on a plan B we obviously would have less time available to focus on the scientific work we are doing.)

I'm sure I neither belong to the best 0.1% nor to the boldest 0.1% so I looked after a plan B.

Because I studied Psychology (working in Neuroscience) I thought about doing the Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Education. I have to say, that this is something I NEVER wanted to do. I wanted to work in research. I think learning about the human mind (in the Therapy Education) might be interesting, but that is about all positive I can think and say about it. Everything else is just very frightening for me. Or in other words, I really don't want to do it, I know I can't, I know I'm not the right person for this. I was a very stupid idea to even consider this. However, I managed to sign the contract for the therapy education... why? I don't know. I mean, it is nothing you do in 5 minutes; you have to apply for it and pass the test and everything.

I convinced myself that I would be interesting to learn these things (and it probably is, but it is a very expensive way to learn this) and then I was - no I am - very dissapointed by the way science/research works (publication biases, problems to publish negative results, statistical methods, lots of underpowered studies, replications not valued in some fields, etc.) and of course scared by the prospect of my possible future (unemployed by 40 if not earlier). And I was/am surrounded by ppl how were/are judging pain patients because they felt bothered by them. I'm sure I wouldn't feel the same way, cause I understand pain sucks and then I'm not bothered very easily (I think at least).

But now, that the start of the education comes sooner and sooner, I just know that I CAN'T give advice to patients. Hell, I don't even know what to say in normal conversations, how I would know what to say to a patient. Most things are very complicated and there are lots of possible ways to look at them... I would only confuse the patients. And would myself never be sure if I understood what the patient meant, just because there are so many different ways of understanding everything...

And then, I don't know if I have the standard opinion on everything. I.E. I'm really unjudgmental (I think, compared to others) and you might think that is good, but it might not always be, because sometimes patients might need advice in that direction just to feel better (and that is the goal of therapy, right? Of course not on the cost of others, but that they feel better.). But I wouldn't be able to do that (it's confusing enough for me).

So now... what do I do? Do I try to get out of that contract (might or might not be possible, but maybe I should figure out). (It might be that someone else who really likes to have that place would get it then, but I don't know.) Or do I spend 5 years of my life (and most of the money I earn) in that education? Of course I have to keep in mind, that jobs in research are and will be very unsave. But I think I wouldn't be a good therapist. So that might answer the question.

Can it be right to make decisions for other people?

On Saturday, as I was walking home on busy streets and busy places... when I was seeing an homeless person* resting on the balustrade to a little artificial pond. This might sound strange, but it actually isn't. The balustrade is low and you can sit on it quite comfortably. He was lying on it. Besides him were standing a couple bottles of beer. I couldn't see if they were all empty but some were. So... I didn't know if he was just resting or if he was in serious danger from alcohol intoxication or if he was about to fall into the pond. I stood there and watched to see if he was breathing or not, while a lot of people were walking by. He was breathing, but he was also moving towards the pond (shifting his weight in this direction).
So I went to him and asked him if he was ok. At first he didn't answer, so I repeated my question and he finally hummed something, but I couldn't understand. I told him, that this was dangerous, but obviously he was not interested in my concerns.
A man stopped his bike, starred, not exactly in that direction, but somewhere and after a few minutes (or maybe less, I don't know) he continued his ride. 
I could have asked him for help, but what else could he have done? Well, I hadn't had my mobile phone with me, so I couldn't call the ambulance. But there was another woman, about 60 to 70 years old, who was sitting in a restaurant nearby and was watching the situation. I went to her. She asked me, if it was his beer. I said, that I don't know and she went with me. She then screamed at him louder than I did before (well, I didn't, I just tried to talk to him) and after that she slapped him in the face a few times. He woke up and she told him to get up. Then a man went by. He called the ambulance then, although the man (the probably homeless one) said he didn't want one.
So I thanked them and went home.

There are some people who think that it is ALWAYS, and defiantly ALWAYS false to lie, to slap someone, to hit someone, to kill, to ... (fill in with things which are mostly seen as not ok), i.e. some things are just categorically false. I do not think so! But why didn't I slap him in the face? Maybe I'm just a scaredy-cat, that is totally possibly. And he had a jack knife in his hand. But it was closed and it was quite fast clear that he was no real danger. Maybe I don't like to decide over people. It was quite clear, he just wanted to lie there and rest, maybe sleep out the alcohol and not be bothered by anyone. Just because he might not have a home, why shouldn't he have a right to be not bothered? He didn't do any harm. So why did I bother then? I could have gone along like all the other people did? And I thought about it, but I would have felt bad if he had died BECAUSE OF ME. Of course there would have been a great chance that he would not have died but I might not find out.

This is, of course, extremely egoistic: that I only cared about his death because I would have felt bad if he died because of me. (I'm not even sure if I did, so I should say: I might feel bad, because...). I wanted to avoid being sleepless thinking about weather he is dead or alive. I'm very clear about this, as I was thinking in that situation "Oh shit, I will not be able to sleep... if..." (this is shorted but in essence what I thought). And now, unfortunately, I'm sleepless, thinking... this.

Obviously, the other people, who just went by, were not as concerned about their well being as I was. That was the reason I decided to interfere. What bothers me is, that I obviously have no idea if it was good for him or not, I simply can't know. That might be a philosophical question (too)?


* I assume. Maybe he wasn't. I don't know.

P.S.: I had to look I few words up, (it is difficult to decide which are the words used in "real language" if you don't know them), I hope this makes some sense.