I actually…didn’t, not until just now. I seem to have completely missed it. Sorry! 
It’s not particularly, no. It’s very common in my field, or at least my former field, (photo)journalism. My general assumption is that if I don’t hear anything from an editor, I’ve done a good job. If I hear something back, it either means I didn’t do something or I did something really great. I’m expected to do a good job. And plenty of people here seem to be saying it’s common typical business-talk, too. And the directness is perhaps even worse in the field of commercial photography.
So, I don’t think this at all is specific to math or left-brained fields. It may be somewhat more common there, perhaps, but it’s not unique.
There is something else that math (and computer) geeks tend to do that this just reminded me of. In fact, I think I’m interpreting the email in the context of this second behavior, which I’ve also witnessed. Maybe the email was just a kind of last straw.
Here’s an example. I was looking at a website the other day that had a whole document on how to ask a question of the community. The gist was that the community will only answer the question asked. For example, if I asked:
“Does anyone know why my router [lots of details here] isn’t working?”
They would answer only, “Yes.” Because, technically, the question is yes/no. But anyone with an ounce of brains would tell you that the real question is “If someone knows, will they tell me?”
I went through this sort of “I’ll answer exactly what you ask me” shit in undergrad, and most recently this weekend in an email exchange. Four fucking years of it with an undergraduate degree in MIS and I’m getting it again. Math-geeks may think it’s cute, but it only serves to promote the idea that there are some “types” of people who “do math” (those with no social skills) and there’s everyone else.
It may be common in business (I worked for a radio station part-time as an undergrad, so I don’t know), but there is a heck of a lot of discussion about the benefits of praising employees. Here’s one article from Business Week that discusses the reasons praise isn’t levied more often.
Sure, it’s just an opinion, but so are the claims that praise is for wimps.
Well, I sure as hell ain’t saying that. Of course praise is important for employees and morale. Like I said, I use the sandwich technique in my dealings with certain people who I know need a little bit of a soft approach. But I think praise is more meaningful when it’s not always expected. Praise me when I’m done and the work really is good and finished. Until then, tell me what it is that I need to do to get my work to that point.
I mean, yes, the email in the OP is curt and short. But it’s not insulting. It’s not mean. It’s just business-like and to-the-point. There’s nothing offensive or demoralizing about it. It’s completely neutral. And that’s your professors (and many other’s) style of communication. Don’t read too much into it.
Your version took longer to read, and even longer to comprehend. His comments were very clear, unambiguous, and IMHO, very constructive as well. I think you just need to get used to the fact that this is how professionals communicate.
Also, a professor isn’t a boss trying to motivate employees and improve productivity. His job is to make sure his student has what it takes to become a competent and independent researcher.
My father kept all of his papers and presentations from when he was completing his doctorate in English. I have seen some of the notes his professors and thesis advisors wrote on the cover page and in the margins. They are just as curt as the ones in the OP.
You weren’t reading The Jargon File, were you? At any rate, no mathematician actually acts like this except maybe as an occasional quickly rectified joke, and it’s nothing like the way your advisor’s e-mail is.
As a math grad student myself, I concur with everything everyone else said: you are being overly sensitive, seeing phantom potential slights in completely neutral and typical texts. As others have noted, this is something you’ve revealed an ongoing tendency of; the problem is not your advisor, but the way you are uncharitably imputing malice to his ordinary actions. I don’t know what it would take to help you stop reading things in this paranoid way, but I do know that it will be for the best for you to learn to do so.
(Of course, when I say “no mathematician actually acts like this”, what I mean is “This would be quite unusual behavior, in my experience”; I can’t claim that no mathematician in the world has ever acted like this in some fashion at some time)
Also, my own post above, you may perhaps feel is some kind of criticism of you, and I understand how you might feel that, but that is not the intention: I’m just trying to dispassionately state my analysis of the situation you present.
HA! Spoken like a true mathematician!
Let me also say, I sympathize with the “Live for the advisor’s approval, and overly scrutinize and antagonize over e-mails with them” phenomenon. You are not alone in this; we all want reassurance and praise, and we’re all a little disappointed when we get a neutral or even critical reply to something we’ve put work into and pinned fantasies of gushing admiration on. But that’s just life.
ETA: Heh, raspberry hunter, you got me.
I have to say that most math geeks I know wouldn’t answer the router question as you phrased it that way, but would answer fairly similar questions in that sort of “answer only the question that is asked” kind of way. It’s not because math geeks think it’s cute. It’s because they expect that others are (as they are) efficient in their communications and so if you ask X, they assume that what you actually want an answer to is X.
For example… I think what you may have meant by the title of your post was “Hey, I need some sympathy here because I feel like my advisor is being too brusque with me” or “Am I wrong to think that he should be writing less harsh emails?” What you actually asked in the title of the post was “Why are math people this way?” (which is an interesting question, I think) which led me to write what I did about efficiency. (Because I am trying to learn how to be a non-math-geek human being as well, though, I tried to partially address the former version of the question as well.)
This (the general idea of communications as about efficiency and not about morale) may not be just a math geek thing, (certainly, now that I think of it, I’ve seen much the same thing in business dealing with non-technical folks – my customer is not necessarily going to praise me for doing X right when he really wants me to have improved Y) but it does play to the strengths of math geeks. Or weaknesses. Or something.
Actually, my life is pretty fucking awesome, thank you.
I’m just using that to show you that you really need to man the fuck up and stop getting butt hurt whenever anyone tells you something critical without first congratulating you for doing your job. You’re an adult, stop whining that people aren’t holding your hand. Stop embarrassing us millenials.
I’m also a statistics graduate student, and I haven’t run into anything like this. It might just be your advisor, but like everyone else has been saying, it’s really nothing worth getting bent out of shape over.
They should be using Beamer. You don’t get exactly as much control over little stuff as you would in Powerpoint, but you can make reasonably good looking presentations without too much work. I don’t know why it’s not better known.
You’re wrong about this also. I’ve read hundreds, perhaps thousands of reviews, and while some may be harsh in giving the paper 1s out of 10s, all the comments have been constructive (and some of the papers really did suck.) The reviewer does not know what the other reviewers are going to say, and a paper they think should be rejected might be accepted (it is a rare paper with all accepts) so it is everyone’s benefit to give comments which will help the author improve the paper - either for a revision or for resubmission elsewhere. If you read your reviews with the attitude that anyone not praising you is telling you it sucks you are never going to get better. Everyone thinks his paper deserves acceptance when it is submitted - most are wrong. The danger of hiding requests for improvements inside of praise is that it is easy to read the praise and skip the criticism. Plus, reviewers are busy and don’t have the time to add flowers to the message.
Yes. Unless you are very new, in business you are expected to know what you are doing, or at least to be able to learn by yourself. In grad school you are not. You do get feedback at work but the message is more subtle.
You must really lovethis commercial then.
And what amazing power you’re ascribing to me, the ability to embarrass all millenials on a little message board like this.
So why is it perfectly acceptable for them to expect people to communicate their way (hey, they’re being efficient. Those who aren’t are fucking useless, right?) but when I express a preference for a different type of communication style, that’s just demanding too much of people? I just want to know what I’m allowed to express a preference for, in a socially acceptable manner, so as not to offend.
I’m not familiar with this rating system. The one paper I’ve submitted to a journal with my advisor just got a big fat “reject” on it, and some written comments that my advisor said “clearly showed they didn’t read the paper.”
It’s the prevailing culture. That’s just the way it is. You can either accept that and work with it or drive yourself mad asking “Why?” all the time.