Why I am not a Ph.D
Why I am not a Ph.D
I am
often asked why I do not actively pursue a doctorate in Islamic studies. After
my experience at UCLA in the '90s, I have since come to believe that a Ph.D is
only a culturally constructed validation specific to a Western context of
knowledge production. In other words, Ph.Ds are a perpetuation of the Western
knowledge industry and everything connected with it. A Ph.D does not
necessarily gauge what someone knows or their actual abilities. In itself, it
is merely the bestowal of a right of passage that is culturally bound. A
Western Ph.D as such is no more and no less a gauge of knowledge and knowledge
production than, say, someone with an ʿijāza who has studied at a
traditional Islamic madrasa (say, Qom
or Najaf) for 10-20 years. Only a consensus reality privileges one over the
other.
Some
believe that there is no place for "non-credentialed" independent
scholars in our society. While begging to differ, such a belief in itself
merely highlights the hegemonic and discriminatory narratives undergirding
views about what constitutes valid modes of knowledge production, which in
itself raises other problematic questions.
While I
deeply cherish and respect the actual persons and the intellects of my many
friends who possess a doctorate, for myself I believe the issue is that at this
stage, at least, I do not need one -- and the moral qualms I have about
becoming an extension (even if unintentionally) of the Western capitalist knowledge
industries, their attempt to taxonomize every form of knowledge, not to mention
their connection to the military-industrial complex, far outweighs anything
else. Moreover, as a Ph.D I believe I would also have to compromise on both my
political beliefs as well as my personal ontology and deeply held spiritual
views, which the secular Western Ivory Tower by definition is either outright
hostile to or would otherwise trivialize and find problematic.
Now a
few years ago a left-wing friend of mine formally rejected their Ph.D upon
qualifying for it. I reproduce their letter to their Thesis Examination
Coordinator below while taking out names and particulars. The reasons
articulated in this letter also echo some of my own concerns about the Ph.D
idol and the knowledge industry it represents.
~
Dear
Thesis Examinations Coordinator
Since
January 2005 I have been enrolled as a Doctoral candidate at X University, and
in July 2008 I submitted a Thesis manuscript to the University for external
examination. During the course of this period of study my political beliefs
have substantially evolved, and I now consider myself a radical scholar.
The
study I produced, titled “XXX,” critically examines how elite power-brokers,
especially those assuming the guise of impartial progressive philanthropists,
work to manipulate civil society to promote and sustain plutocratic political
arrangements. In the final stages of this research, I examined how elite
manipulation operates within academia – which led to my presenting a
peer-review paper titled, “XXX,” at the XXX Political Science Association
conference that was held last year at the University of X (July 6-9, 2008).
This paper demonstrated how powerful liberal individuals and their
philanthropic foundations have manipulated the university system to help
bolster a capitalist political status quo. I concluded that:
Sustaining
useful autonomous activist research within universities requires that radical
scholars who choose to remain within the system fight to retain vital
connections with one another and with activists working outside of the
university environs. However, in my view, undertaking such scholarship only
lends a fig leaf of respectability to what are at root capitalist enterprises; consequently
a purist and more sustainable solution requires that radical intellectuals step
out of the university world and work to create alternative, people-powered
institutions that can seriously challenge the status quo.
As my
research and learning has imparted this world view within me, I now find myself
in a position where accepting this PhD is not possible. With this in mind I
wish to inform you that I will not be handing in the revised PhD manuscript,
titled “XXX.” My decision is consistent with the views expressed above.
I wish
to emphasize that the research and analyses that informed this decision were
undertaken in the closing months of my candidature, and even upon handing in my
manuscript I was still unsure as to how I should proceed with regard to
accepting the PhD. Rather than simply resign my candidature prior to handing in
my thesis, I determined that a more powerful political statement could be made
by rejecting the concept of receiving a PhD after it was accepted by the
external examiners. In this way, detractors could not assert that I was
incapable of completing a PhD, only that I had decided not to accept it. The
difference is critical given my view of the political role that universities
fulfill in justifying plutocracy.
Critically,
I wish to demonstrate that I am rejecting the formal academic
institution and not the reverse. For this reason, I have waited for the Chair’s
final decision, which required only minor changes to the thesis, before
informing X University that I would not be making the suggested corrections.
Yours
sincerely
X
