T

his election cycle has seen 
a carousel of hot topics 
ranging from whether 

we 
should 

accept Syrian 
refugees 
to 
which 

bathrooms 
individuals can and can’t use. In 
this series of debates, one thing 
that has become increasingly 
clearer is that the United States 
may be facing a polarization 
crisis. Though I would argue that 
polarization isn’t inherently bad, 
the real problem lies within our 
inability to understand opinions 
different from ours. 

Americans disagree strongly 

on 
many 
hot-button 
issues, 

and people on both sides are 
incredibly passionate about their 
beliefs. However, polarization 
stems beyond party lines. We are 
not only polarized on the issues 
themselves; we are polarized on 
how we prioritize these issues. 
Bernie 
Sanders 
stresses 
the 

importance of taking money out 
of politics. Meanwhile, Donald 
Trump’s biggest concern seems 
to be immigration. Not only do 
these candidates disagree on 
individual topics, but they also 
disagree on which issues are 
most important — and the same 
can be said about the American 
people.

A New Boston Post article 

has recently made the rounds 
on Facebook. The article seems 
to challenge modern American 
priorities. The author questions 
whether Americans are arguing 
over 
noteworthy 
topics. 
For 

example, 
is 
the 
transgender 

bathroom debate so significant 
that laws need to be passed to 
tell people which bathrooms 
they can or can’t use? Is it even 
possible to enforce those laws?

If we can afford to spend 

resources telling people which 

bathrooms they can’t use, we 
can certainly spend time and 
money trying to feed the 15.3 
million children living in food-
insecure households, right? Let’s 
not forget our homeless veterans; 
they deserve shelter and food 
as well, right? Or, perhaps, are 
these just issues that I have at 
the top of my priorities?

While 
questioning 
the 

relevance or significance of our 
priorities is important, the author 
of the article seems to imply 
that having different opinions 
is somehow unacceptable. The 
author seems concerned that 
polarization and division are 
going to ruin the country, which 
is an understandable concern.

Concerned 
that 
my 
liberal 

perspective 
on 
issues 
was 

contributing 
to 
polarization, 

I 
evaluated 
my 
priorities. 
I 

contemplated 
taking 
more 

moderate stances on issues that 
were most important to me, such 
as campaign finance reform, tax 
reform and education reform. 
However, 
after 
reflecting 
on 

my priorities, I came to the 
conclusion that polarization isn’t 
inherently bad. I believe that 
the major problem is a lack of 
understanding. The article led 
me to question whether my own 
convictions 
are 
problematic. 

Generally speaking, our opinions 
do not seem to be troublesome, 
but our inability to coexist with 
our differences of opinions is 
unsettling.

Most of us believe that our 

opinions and perspectives are 
correct, and we often find ourselves 
discussing our convictions with 
others who disagree. But I know 
my discussions tend to become 
arguments, 
and 
my 
passion 

sometimes becomes my weakness. 
Allowing my passion to control 
how I debate results in hostility 
and intolerance.

For example, when discussing 

welfare 
with 
a 
colleague, 
I 

expressed that I believe the U.S. 
government has an obligation 
to feed and shelter its most 
vulnerable citizens, regardless of 
whether the citizens are working 
or 
seeking 
employment. 
My 

colleague argued that anyone who 
wishes to collect welfare should, at 
the very least, be actively seeking 
employment or be employed. In 
hindsight, I probably should’ve 
recognized that as a reasonable 
perspective. However, my passion 
took over and I questioned why my 
colleague hated the poor. I know 
my colleague doesn’t hate the 
poor, but instead of arguing the 
reasoning behind my colleague’s 
opinion, I simply attacked his 
character. That’s a mistake that I 
currently try to avoid making, as 
it’s an unwarranted judgment of 
others.

For a while, especially after 

reading the article, I thought 
perhaps I’d be better off having 
no 
opinion 
on 
some 
topics. 

But perhaps the real issue was 
my 
inability 
to 
understand 

the perspectives of those who 
disagree with me. Rather than 
criticize opposing views, I began 
to try to understand them and 
in 
turn 
found 
myself 
much 

more comfortable with my own 
opinions. Rather than avoiding 
your 
own 
opinions, 
embrace 

them. At the same time, challenge 
yourself 
to 
understand 
the 

opinions of others. If individuals 
can work to understand others 
rather than reject them, I think 
we would find ourselves less 
concerned about polarization. I 
believe we are more than capable 
of coexisting with others who 
have opinions opposite of our 
own.

—Ryan Roose can be reached 

at rooserj@umich.edu.

4

Thursday, June 2, 2016
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
OPINION

LARA MOEHLMAN

EDITOR IN CHIEF

JEREMY KAPLAN

EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR

BRADLEY WHIPPLE

MANAGING EDITOR

420 Maynard St. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48109

 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at 

the University of Michigan since 1890.

 Why you should do a Ph.D.
I

t’s that time of year when college 
students, 
especially 
rising 

seniors, are thinking about 

what to do after 
college. If you’re 
considering 
graduate school, 
I’d like to offer 
my two cents. Starting a Ph.D., just 
like beginning a professional doctoral 
program such as medicine, dentistry 
or law, is a serious undertaking that 
requires much consideration. There’s 
also a lot of public misconception 
about the worth of a Ph.D. compared 
to other professional degrees. So 
if you’re between graduate school 
and another option, consider the 
following:

1. A Ph.D. opens doors to 

a 
variety 
of 
career 
paths.

While 
medical 
students 
nearly 

always become doctors and law 
students typically become lawyers, 
Ph.D.s don’t just become researchers 
and academics upon graduating. 
Consulting 
firms, 
publications, 

intellectual property offices and 
venture capital groups all hire Ph.D.s. 
Holding a doctorate in a field makes 
you an expert, which makes you quite 
valuable to individuals needing a 
skilled worker on a specific task, and 
also gives you professional talents 
that can be applied in many different 
positions. Ph.D.s know how to 
analyze data, look for trends, problem 
solve and write. They’re utilitarian.

2. It teaches real-world skills.
The 
environment 
in 
which 

research is done, in many ways, 
mimics a job. You have colleagues 
with whom you develop professional 
relationships and learn to work 
constructively. You have an overseer 
to monitor your progress and provide 
direction. Working on a Ph.D. means 
more than spending time at a lab 
bench or sitting in an office. You 
have opportunities to present work 
to your colleagues at meetings and 
to give talks to larger audiences. 
You develop composure and learn to 
speak with fluidity. Conferences and 
symposia are perfect for learning 
how to meet strangers and have 
meaningful conversations, enabling 
new connections. If you finish a 
Ph.D. not having acquired most of 
these skills, you aren’t doing it right.

3. It’s often funded.
Starting graduate school doesn’t 

have to mean taking out loans or 
remaining financially dependent. 
Many doctoral programs, especially 
in science and engineering, provide 
their students with funds for tuition 
and living expenses. When they 
don’t, fellowships for just about 
every discipline are also available, 

or a Graduate Student Instructor 
(GSI) appointment can be used to 
defray the cost. With funding, you’re 
getting paid to earn an advanced 
degree, which itself increases your 
earning power. Very few degrees 
have that perk. You also learn 
important life skills along the 
way such as budgeting your own 
money, prioritizing your expenses 
and choosing an appropriate living 
arrangement. It’s a sensible first step 
upon leaving college.

4. It won’t take you eight years.
Maybe you’re willing to forgo 

starting a job immediately out of 
college to begin graduate school, but 
the thought of beginning a funded 
dual degree, such as an M.D./Ph.D., 
seems too excessive. I know and have 
loads of respect for the people who 
pursue such a track. But I wanted 
a program where I could complete 
in my 20s and immediately begin 
working, earning money that I could 
enjoy for a few years before thinking 
about settling down and starting a 
family. With a Ph.D., you’ll still feel 
young at the end, and you won’t ever 
be thinking to yourself, “I should 
have stayed in school longer.”

5. You’ll be making a completely 

new contribution to your field.

Because a Ph.D. is a research 

degree, it means you will learn what 
is known about your subject area and 
what is not. Then, you can choose a 
knowledge gap you are curious about 
and fill it. Your findings will interest 
others working in similar fields, and 
others after you will have your work 
to build from, incrementally growing 
the horizon. Research advances 
gradually, and even the biggest 
discoveries don’t happen without 
a firm foundation of prior work. 
When you tell others what you’re 
working on — whether it’s curing a 
disease, understanding something 
new about an ancient civilization or 
inventing a more energy-efficient 
means of transportation — they’ll be 
impressed.

It’s important to have a rewarding 

career, but if you’re spending several 
years preparing yourself for it, those 
years should be rewarding too. A 
Ph.D. is far more than completing 
coursework and passing classes. 
It means making a new discovery 
that enables research to progress, 
helping us to understand our world. 
Some day in the future, a physician 
or lawyer might apply something 
you discovered to help someone else. 
Research fuels all professions. Get 
involved.

—David Mertz can be reached 

at drmertz@umich.edu.

DAVID 
MERTZ

Embrace your opinions to understand others’

RYAN
ROOSE

