What does pull me is the idea of research itself: actually discovering new stuff, adding to knowledge instead of just using what's already there. The problem is I don't have a field that excites me yet. I feel like I haven't seen enough of any discipline to know if it's worth years (or a lifetime) of focus.
For people who ended up in research careers, how did you figure it out? Was there a specific moment, project, class, paper, or random conversation that inspired you? Did you mostly wander through undergrad, switching majors or labs or taking odd electives until something stuck, or did it come earlier for you?
How do you know when something is more than a passing interest, when it's the kind of thing that could actually sustain you long-term? Is it the questions that keep nagging at you years later, or the daily grind of experiments/debugging/reading feeling surprisingly okay (or even good), or some other signal? Any stories from when you were directionless at my age but eventually found your thing would be great. Low-stakes ways a freshman could poke around different areas without locking in too soon? Summer programs, random labs, self-reading that helped?
ggm•1h ago
Having people come back with good questions helped. It means they are interested in the stories you are telling. Even being told they found weaknesses in your story helps, because it suggests there is more work to do.
Finding peers helps. Ruben Hirsch has talked about how in mathematics your field can be so narrow there are only 4 people you can talk to and 2 of them are doing your peer review so when things are rejected, you know who rejected it. He talks about this as a problem, but it's in the context of a branching tree of fields and of course there are parent branches with more people and side branches with more people. The point is not to have no speciality (being a generalist is a choice too) but the point is to understand who else is in your field and how you relate to them and talk to them.
Many biologists simply love the animal they study. to you or me it's just a ladybird. To them, it is embued with all the ideals of what being a ladybird IS, and that begs questions: why that number of dots? Is more dots more fertile? Is less dots more visible to a predator? Do more dots weigh more? do they cost more energy to paint? Where do ladybirds buy dot paint from? At this point, you are the ladybird. you are consumed by dots. Your life as you knew it, is defined by ladybirds. It helps that a famous movie actor is now enacting ladybird sex movies for kicks, making your fascination with ladybirds both topical, and interesting. You used to wear a small ladybird badge to parties. You are now at the igNobels, dressed as a ladybird, accepting a prize.
4 decades ago I was a bottle washer and water collector on slave wages for a long term marine ecology measurement of water quality and flows around an estuary. I visited the beach 60 times in a year. I could imagine myself being consumed by fascination with tides, and becoming a tides person, or with seaweed/laminaria and becoming a kelp farmer, or with nudibranches and somehow now measuring sewage levels indirectly by nudibranch population statistics, or designing better sewage outlets after learning how this influences water quality. Meh. I gave up marine biology bottle washing and took up computing. But the choice was there.
My point is that sure, you need to pay the bills, but also pay some respect to a drive in yourself to want to find out things. Thats key.