Pursuing a PhD is inherently a solitary endeavor. Opting for a PhD in History is an even more niche path among the myriad of less trodden ones. Those familiar with doctoral studies know that embarking on a PhD is a career choice. Most who undertake this path do so with the aim of dedicating themselves to academic research in the future (i.e., publishing within universities). Although there are also PhD students in business, finance, and economics who venture into the commercial sector (mostly in research departments of financial institutions) or those in science and engineering who engage in invention and entrepreneurship, the standard destination for PhD graduates is, after all, academic research.

From the perspective of career choices, the profession of a 'scholar' comes with many issues, yet it also has its attractions. The problems have been discussed extensively in various blogs and Facebook pages (such as 'This PhD is Just My Burden' and 'I Am a Researcher'), generally including meager salaries (compared to the business sector), unstable prospects (before securing a tenure-track position), the immense pressure to publish (publish or perish), and most importantly, the scarcity of high-quality positions in the industry (indicating an oversupply of PhD graduates). The attractions, however, lie in the considerable freedom in work and the opportunity to delve into academic projects of personal interest.

In summary, I believe that the average person should not pursue a PhD unless they are one in ten thousand academic geniuses like Shen Shijun or Terence Tao. The hardships of the academic path are magnified tenfold for the average individual. Those with talent find it easy to make a living through academia. With generous and stable professor salaries, they don't have to worry about their next meal, allowing them to enjoy the freedom of academic work and the pleasure of dedicating themselves to their fields of interest. As for the average person, passion cannot put food on the table, and enthusiasm for a subject often succumbs to the anxiety of making a living and securing a teaching position.

Engaging in academic research as a hobby is a beautiful thing in itself. The difficulty arises when the hobby mixes with the pressure to earn a living, that is, the problems faced when academic research becomes a means to make ends meet. This is especially true for disciplines like history, which lack commercial prospects.

It's not that one cannot pursue a PhD or study history, but rather that it should be done without financial pressure. As a career, being a scholar—especially a historian—is not a good choice. However, pursuing it as an amateur or for personal development is perfectly fine. Take Jin Yong, for example, who, after achieving fame and fortune, pursued a PhD in history, carrying his schoolbag to class—how carefree. Then there's former Bank of Communications economist Luo Jiacong, who, after making enough in the banking sector, pursued a master's in astrophysics to explore the mysteries of the universe. Such潇洒的情操 is impossible for scholars who view academia as a profession and a last resort for making a living.

I also have a fondness for history. After reading Professor Zhou Youguang's preface to 'China Without an Emperor,' the thought of studying history has lingered in my mind.

"The evolutionary trajectory of human history:

  Culture moves from theological to metaphysical to scientific thinking;

  Economy transitions from agricultural to industrial to informational;

  Politics shifts from theocracy to monarchy (autocracy) to democracy.

  All nations are racing on the same historical track, and China is no exception.

  Assessing how far China has progressed on this track is the historical responsibility of every intellectual.

  This is the purpose of the book.

  Preface."