Are handbooks on a particular field you are interested in, the fastest and most comprehensive way of learning about that field. For instance, if I were interested in cognitive science would a book like "Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Science" be the best way to go. Also, if there are multiple handbooks from different publishers which one should I pick?
Asked
Active
Viewed 533 times
2
-
I'll note that unless you qualify it a bit, in some fields it isn't possible. An undergraduate degree in mathematics, for example, gives you a fairly comprehensive understanding, but there is just too much in the field to know it all. But getting a fundamental notion of the essence of the field is more attainable, but won't come from handbooks which stress detail over deep understanding, I think. But I've never looked at the tome you cite. – Buffy Feb 20 '19 at 19:05
-
1I think in mathematics it would be a very exceptional undergrad degree that would give any “comprehensive” understanding at all... and there are no meaningful “handbooks” in mathematics. Unclear that other subjects’ alleged “handbooks” really do any better. I can understand that there is some impulse to call a thing a “handbook”, but that doesn’t mean that it fulfills the role. – paul garrett Mar 23 '19 at 01:17
-
according to my experience: no. Those books are just for reference, not suitable for teaching & learning – Our Sep 09 '20 at 03:07
-
A PhD in mathematics doesn't even give a comprehensive overview of mathematics as a field! It's so vast and frankly esoteric I don't think anyone could have a comprehensive understanding of it. – FourierFlux Sep 09 '20 at 03:13
2 Answers
0
The answer of course is "it depends" on the field, the handbook, your ability, and what exactly you need in terms of learning the field.
In general, I think you are better off getting an easier review article or a textbook. But a handbook may have a lot of condensed information and be a sort of "encyclopedia" of the field. But generally, it is written more for practitioners than for newbies. It is not (usually) written exactly for your problem.
To evaluate handbooks, ask others opinions, look at Amazon reviews, and skim it in the library.
guest
- 21
- 1
0
To me a comprehensive understanding of a field means that you understand, apart from the methods and theories applied in a scientific branch or topic, especially the past closed and open major questions. As a PhD student you should be able to ask such questions at some point, then you have the intellectual maturity to work independently from your supervisor, as a post-doc or pursuing an academic career, the PhD is then rather a formal issue to succeed in technically. When and how you reach this level of understanding, some even not after getting PhD, is very individual.
A good way to get there are reading review articles over the years, discussing with colleagues on conferences ideas/problems at poster sessions, but also reading intentionally journals that have only interdisciplinary connections to your special topic and methods or googling roadmaps of distinct fields published often in journals or by institutions like EU research ressort. Handbooks are scientific dictionaries to look up details, you don't understand a language by reading one. Your PhD work has to/should try to penetrate the boundaries of published literature and knowledge and for this you need to know the details, but also see the bigger picture/questions behind your topic. But I don't think you need a comprehensive understanding of a whole field to earn a PhD, often the requirements are much lower. But for an academic career/tenure in a competitive field it will be necessary, also not sufficient.
PS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_unsolved_problems today it is also easier to increase your understanding, if you use modern tools and know that google and search engines for scientific literature have powerful search operators
user48953094
- 4,346
- 14
- 25