text:
Will there be consequences for not participating in ShutDownSTEM?
I am a tenure-track researcher in STEM fields. On June 9th, I was told that all meetings scheduled next day were cancelled so that we can be a part of #ShutDownSTEM. I was not aware of it, and I actually thought it was a joke1 (I purposely isolated myself from real-world news).
So I kept all the meetings. On June 10th, it was business as usual for my group. Other people certainly knew we were working on that day.
Will our disobedience lead to trouble later?
Update: Okay, it is actually slightly worse than how I initially described it. Originally I did not know about ShutDownSTEM. On the 10th, however, some graduate students did stop by our lab and explain to us that we should use that day to reflect on ...... someting. My postdoc and I, both being people of color, were somewhat annoyed by such intrusion. So we explain to them we support their cause, but we not are going to spend a day watching netflix, and send them on their way. We certainly tried to be as polite as possible. But I suppose it wouldn't be unfair to say we dismissed their demand.

In my defense, if the president of the university tells me to take a day off so that we can BurnDownUniversity, I'd certainly think it is a joke.

What is shutdownSTEM?

Who told you to cancel meetings? Your boss or some random colleague?

@JonasSchwarz, it was a day intended to reflect on the issues of racism in the US: https://www.shutdownstem.com

How would anyone know that you didn't participate at least part of the time?

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please see this FAQ before posting another comment. In particular, there is no way to move comments to chat more than once, so any further answers-in-comments or discussion of ShutDownSTEM's merits will be deleted without warning.

@WolfgangBangerth Usually, in labor stoppages, "participat[ing] at least part of the time" is not better than particpating all of the time

Well it’s been four years. How did things turn out? And out of curiosity do you really see this as disobedience?

Will our disobedience lead to trouble later?

Anything is possible, and some things are a lot more possible these days than they were just a couple of months ago. It’s quite reasonable for you to be worried.
But let’s be clear. You didn’t “think it was a joke”. That is a poor way to explain your outlook and increases the chance that you will be criticized, perhaps harshly, by people who don’t have patience for nuance, facts, and the intricacies of human nature in these turbulent times. It’s probably more accurate and more productive to say that the whole thing was so unexpected and took you so much by surprise that you did not immediately appreciate how important the shutdownstem event was as a way of expressing your support for an important social movement. Thrown off, unsure what to do, and being a creature of habit and passionate about your work and its importance to science and to society, you ended up sticking with your usual routine. ... Right?
Similarly, I think it’s a mistake to use the word “disobedience” to frame your behavior. Researchers in US academia do not take orders from anyone about when or with whom to hold meetings. If you carefully read the emails you received I am sure you will discover that none of the stuff about canceling meetings and participating in the shutdown day is phrased as a directive. It was almost certainly a “suggestion” or “strong recommendation”, or you were “encouraged to participate”, “invited to reflect on systemic racism”, etc. And indeed I am confident that you reflected on many important issues that day (and most other days in the last couple of months), as pretty much everyone has been doing. Do not play into the hands of overzealous activists who presume to see into your heart and know what you care about and what you don’t care about by professing to a willful disobedience you are not guilty of. Instead, anyone criticizing you for not participating should be forced to acknowledge that the invitation to participate was precisely that - an invitation, making it entirely reasonable and acceptable to decline.
I could go on with a few similar things in your post that suggest a somewhat cavalier attitude that opens you up to a heightened level of scrutiny and criticism. Please try not to give anyone asking about the shutdown the impression that you find the recent nationwide events uninteresting, unimportant, or not worthy of being thought about or taken seriously. When you write things like “I purposely isolated myself from real-world news”, “reflect on ... something”, and “send them on their way” you sound dismissive and create a serious risk of being misunderstood. Since you support the cause of the activists, it would be foolish of them to come after you, but if by your words you give them the wrong impression, it’s quite possible that some of them will not be as thoughtful or charitable to you as they should be.
Bottom line: think defensively about this. Your actions were reasonable, but much could depend on the precise way in which you explain what happened if questioned. Also, find allies who know you and would be willing to come to your defense if push comes to shove. I hope it doesn’t come to that though, and it very well might not. Good luck!

Edit: note that I am posting here using my real identity. In such times when discussing potentially controversial topics I’m always cognizant of the possibility that in the process of offering advice to some anonymous person I never met I may be inadvertently opening myself up for potential attack or criticism by anyone who disagrees with what I wrote or interprets what I wrote in a different way than how I intended.
Oh well, it is what it is I guess. But just to clarify in case anyone gets the wrong idea about what I’m saying: in this answer I’m addressing OP’s concern about possible criticism and/or career damage given their actions during the recent STEM shutdown day of protest, and only that. I’m not commenting on any political movements or points of view and their significance, worthiness, virtue etc, so please do not interpret any of what I wrote as commentary of that type.

"You didn’t “think it was a joke”." Are you saying that the OP reacted inappropriately, or are you literally saying that you know what the OP thought or didn't think? I find it... problematic... to tell people what they are thinking. Especially since two paragraphs later you discuss people presuming "to see into your heart".

@StephanKolassa The point is that the OP can think whatever they wish, but if questioned, they shouldn't tell that they thought it was a joke. That's a recipe for disaster.

This does not answer the question.

@StephanKolassa I am trying to help OP with what seems like a tricky (and potentially career-threatening) situation to navigate. I think it’s clear enough what I mean, let’s not be literal to the point of ridiculousness.

@AnonymousPhysicist an owl on the hunt does not always fly in a straight line to intercept its prey.

I agree with Stephen that that paragraph is confusing in context of the "see into your heart" line. But I agree with the notion that the OP probably didn't see the email, laugh out loud and think "thanks for the funny joke, Dr. Chair." But I think this answer is ultimately correct that this is a bad attitude to portray if the OP does, in fact, support the general movement. Although I am wondering where in the world people are just stopping by labs to chat now. +1

I think the suggested response is ceding too much ground. The OP may well have thought #shutdownSTEM is a joke because it very much walks and quacks like a joke; it's something you would expect to see if you look up "slacktivism" in an encyclopedia. Agreeing with the premise that it is an important and helpful step towards equality means exposing oneself to serious moral criticism for not taking it seriously.

The thing the OP might want to apologize for is for preventing others from joining the protest (although if no one actually asked for rescheduling, they are ultimately free of guilt to any reasonable eyes). That the OP themselves did not join the protest should not be a matter of contention.

@darijgrinberg can you point to a specific sentence in my answer where I cede too much ground and/or agree with the premise you are referring to? Anyway, to clarify, I don’t advocate any extreme either of unquestionably accepting the premises of the most zealous activists or going all the way in the other direction and declaring shutdown stem a ridiculous joke. One can be tolerant and respectful of other people’s opinions even if you disagree with them, and without necessarily letting on if that is the case.

"you did not immediately appreciate how important the shutdownstem event was as a way of expressing your support for an important social movement" rather sounds like ceding this ground. Better yet, think of my comment as complementing your suggestion; the axis of non-participation vs. preventing others from participating is important IMHO.

@darijgrinberg I don’t think it’s buying into any premises (“I did not immediately appreciate” leaves open the question of whether OP currently appreciates that...), but I see I’m starting to nitpick. Broadly speaking I agree with your point that OP has some useful room to calibrate the response in various directions, so thanks for pointing that out.

I doubt there could be any official consequences at all under the circumstances. Of course if you did so to support racist policies or denigrate BLM (Black Lives Matter) then you might be castigated for that. But the thing was put together very quickly and I'm not surprised that many didn't know of it or understand the purpose, though many universities promoted it quite heavily.
You may have a bit of explaining to do if questioned on it, but if rules aren't properly promulgated they can't fairly be enforced. The name itself, requires a bit of explanation, so thinking it was a joke shouldn't be an issue.
I'm a bit surprised, though, that no one in your group knew of it or bothered to explain it.

And some of the explaining you might have to do is to your students if they think less of you for what occurred.

About the last paragraph: if I was a PhD student or postdoc under the OP, I would avoid talking with them about matters that could be perceived as political, especially if they just received a uni-wide email and seemed not to care.

@UJM. fair enough. Still surprised.

I downvoted because in the current climate, and seing past events (e.g. Bret Weinstein), "I doubt there could be any consequences" is misleading and can cause OP a lot of trouble. Clarification: I fully support the protests, but we are in a very volatile time where small criticism of methods should probably be left for later , and its highly likely to be taken negatively by the stronger supporters. I dont want a political argument about this, just pointing out that its likely to be taken negatively and have consecuences

@ssquidd The STEM community is alarmed, as you can see in the comments on the question.

(actually I wouldn't be surprised if the name had been written by someone who wants the whole "racism awareness thing" to fail)

@ssquidd, actually it originated within the STEM academic community. It wasn't something imposed by "outsiders". There was a lot of discussion in my field about how to make the best use of the day.

@ssquidd: Why would you be alarmed by the name? We know that the world has lots of anti-STEM people. It only helps if they label themselves as such. The more worrying part is that such people apparently exist within academia.

Why would the name be worrying? Work stoppages and shut downs are a time honored mechanism for demonstrating values and bringing about change. To show that we care for our values beyond the immediate benefit (whether financial, career or furthering our science) that would accrue from one days labor.

@IanSudbery, I still remember student/faculty "strikes" during the Vietnam war era.

@Buffy UK academics (including me) have been on strike twice since September, for a total of six weeks of stoppage over a range of issues including the casualisation of the workforce, inequalities (gender and race) in pay, workload, pay not keeping up with inflation, and the downgrading of the national academics pension.

@MSalters Support of a one-day work stoppage is not the same as being "anti-STEM," lol

Just for the record, until this post I have never heard of the #ShutDownSTEM movement, and I am in STEM.

In your update you mention that you are a person of color.
In my observation, ShutDownSTEM was largely aimed at white people -- who have not experienced structural racism, and who may not have thought about it deeply.
Several of my professor friends on Facebook are social justice activists. A consistent point that they make (via sharing blog posts, etc.) is that white people should do more of the work, carry more of the burden, of ending structural racism. In general, their criticism is not aimed at people of color.
Although I cannot predict how people will behave, I would be very surprised if you faced negative consequences.

People of color get cancelled every once in a while (particularly if they don't belong to the currently fashionable mascot minorities, but sometimes even when they do). While I don't think the OP will be in trouble, I wouldn't assume their ethnicity is automatically a shield.

The distinction most common drawn in the context of STEM in the United States is not "person of color" versus "white" but "underrepresented groups" versus everyone with greater representation.


text:
How do I know what I burn for? About to get a PhD, but lost my drive
I am a few months away from completing my PhD (nanotech/chemistry), I'm "just" writing my thesis. But I somehow feel like I have lost my motivation and I am confused about my future. I began the PhD with great enthusiasm, as I was going to do organic synthesis again after a short break.
As the project (together with a company) progressed, I felt the pressure from the company to just deliver something. So, I felt like being pushed to cut some corners in the academic work, just to present something for my boss and the company, eager to get some products launched.
Later the project changed focus in a direction a little far from my skill set and I got a new supervisor in the company. But my frustrations increased during the last year, not only because I had little progress, but also because I never felt my boss appreciated my work. Actually, they didn't really bother listening to what I have learned and continued doing things their way (why was I hired in the first place?). My supervisor at the university is a really nice person and really skilled in organic chemistry, but he has little experience in my project and is always way too busy to give proper advice.
Sometimes, I just feel like a useful idiot, working many hours (sacrificing time with my kids) without much appreciation in the other end.
Alright, that was the background. Basically, I love developing new stuff and doing research, but I don't feel at home in the industry. At the university I am at right now, they can't really use a guy like me with my broad but vague skill set. Another university (actually my alma mater) would really like me to work there, but they lack the funding. Adding to this, I cannot readily identify what I am passionate about - other than working in the lab.
So, I guess I am stuck in a dilemma. I feel like I'm not skilled enough (despite I made my first publication just after getting the BSc) to be interesting for the universities. But going to the industry, the little hope left for an academic position will vanish after short time. Maybe things will work out just fine if I just work with the things I love doing - whatever they are.
Any suggestions? I had a passion for organic chemistry once, particularly medicinal chemistry, but I'm not sure if I've been working for too long away from hardcore organic chemistry to be considered at i.e. drug companies.

From what you've said it sounds like your leadership might be the root cause of your loss of passion.  Perhaps you should consider positions elsewhere, or try to shift your work load to emphasize the things you like doing.  Rest and time with family are also important to keep your interest in your work, it's easy to run low on drive when chronically overworked.

What you feel now it is very normal. I would suggest if possible to start a side project/collaboration with the people at the university if you have the time, and try to focus also on what you really like. Good luck!

Well, today my university supervisor wrote to me (after mailing him the first part of the thesis draft), that he didn't intend to read it - just skim it and maybe correct at few errors and give me suggestions if there are some obvious mistakes. I know he is busy, but - really? Isn't it his responsibility to be sure I am doing it right?

Obligatory link to our perennially top-voted question: How should I deal with discouragement as a graduate student?

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Cite a paper by DOI
I would like to cite a paper in the reference of my paper. However, the paper I want to cite is online published by a journal for the time being, and has not been assigned to an issue yet.
If I cite the paper by its DOI number, that is, "name of the author, title of the paper, name of the journal, DOI: XXXXXXXXXX", will this citation be calculated into the number of the citation by Journal Citation Reports (JCR)?

So the article in question has been accepted, has a DOI, appears on the journal homepage, but has yet to be printed? In that case I'd use the "forthcoming" as the year. For instance: "Author name(s). Title. Journal in question (forthcoming).
doi:XXXXXXXX". I do not know the answer to the the question about the JCR.

You could contact the authors of the paper they might know better what to do.

Are you submitting your paper to a journal (or conference proceedings or similar)? The journal most probably has rules for formatting reference lists, and citing a paper before it gets assigned page numbers is common enough for them to have exact instructions, so you don't have a lot of choice in that case.

The Journal Citation Reports (JCR) are a byproduct of Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science. Hence, citations that are in Web of Science are also counted in the JCR. So, your question boils down to this: if you cite a work that has not been formally published yet, will it be recognized as such in Web of Science?
The citation matching algorithm of Web of Science is a company secret, as far as I'm aware, so I canot give a definitive answer. In my personal experience (for what it's worth), citations to unpublished work (mentioning all bibliographic details, including DOI) are usually recognized if the publication year is correct. This is sometimes hard because publication delays may take up to (or more than) a year.
What can you do? First, make sure that all verifiable details in your reference are correct, including author names, journal, title and DOI. Second, if it eventually turns out that Web of Science did not process the citation link between your paper and the one cited correctly, there is an easy solution: you can ask for a correction. If DOIs and other metadata match, then this is typically no problem. It may take a few weeks before the request is processed though.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
A question regarding renewal of postdoc fellowship, and the mentor not making the picture clear
I'm a postdoc in Europe on a one year contract, where the renewal is not necessarily guaranteed. When I was interviewed, I was told that the his grant was for a year, and whether it'd renew would depend on the results of his next grant application. After my mentor hired me and things were confirmed, I noticed at least two other advertisements posted by him looking for postdocs, even with slightly increased salary. When I eventually talked to him about renewal, his response was: "I'd first like to work with you and see how you do". When I was hired by him, I was already in my third year of postdoc, and indeed in a top school in the US. Several times he had reminded me that the time is limited-one year, and pushed me to work fast.
Based on the above, I suspect that it's not the case that he doesn't have funding. Questions: Is he telling me lies? Is what he's doing a standard thing to do? I ask this, because I find this rather sketchy and selfish-the mentor wants to divide the money in more than one postdocs to maximize the publications as quickly as possible, but it really doesn't give the postdoc a stability. As you see, I cannot ask him directly about the follow-up advertisements, because obviously he'd say it's none of my business. I think I understand his view-he doesn't want to take a risk, but given that I was already a senior postdoc at a top 20 US school, was productive, switched to something very related and was the first choice for this postdoc position, I don't find a basis for his hesitation.
I'd very much appreciate your opinion and reflection on this topic. I bolded the questions so that there's no confusion of what I want the answer to.

"but given that I was already a senior postdoc at a top US school, I don't find a basis for his hesitation": Being able to perform well in a group does not guarantee that you will perform well in another group.

And I completely agree with you (upvoted). But the question is really about his hiding facts.
Regarding your comment though, I switched my postdoc research area to something very much related to what I was doing before, and also I was his first choice for the position-not that I had to wait till the most preferred applicant canceled.

I cannot ask him directly about the follow-up advertisements, because obviously he'd say it's none of my business — Sure, he can say that it's none of your business, but he'd be wrong.  Have you considered applying to the better-paying postdoc yourself?

@JeffE: I'm considering it for sure, but this position has just started 2 months ago. I'm definitely on the lookout for industrial positions as well. But a better paying postdoc would be good too.
I do thank you for your sympathetic comment! Coming from a professor himself, it means even more to me.

There may be deadlines by which he needs to spend the money.  He may even be offering a higher salary because he has (say) a year's salary to spend in 11 months.

Europe is not a homogeneous blob; which country in Europe? Things work very differently in different countries.

I didn't mention that since sometimes this site has over specification rules-it's France, but the mentor isn't French, although European.
Speaking about which though, I noticed a significant difference between French and American work contracts. In France, my contract was only given after talking to me informally on Skype and that was final, whereas in the US, I had the option of reviewing my work contract before finalizing anything.

@ScienceMan About your last comment, in several European countries where universities are mostly public, contracts are defined by country standards and non-negotiable, and their clauses are frequently given in the application documentation. Given your specification about the country, I'd say that Dirk and xLeitix's answers are probably the most applicable.

From what you explained, I don't see anything particularly unethical or unusual going on. Let's go over things:

I was told that the his grant was for a year, and whether it'd renew would depend on the results of his next grant application. After my mentor hired me and things were confirmed, I noticed at least two other advertisements posted by him looking for postdocs

I am not sure what your mentor hiring other postdocs has to do with your contractual obligation. Maybe your mentor has multiple projects? Maybe the grant that he uses to pay you also pays for additional postdocs? All of this does not mean that your mentor could have also used the funding to give you a longer contract immediately, even if he wanted to.
That being said, even is he could have given you a longer contract but chose not to, I am not sure why you would be angry about this. It's not that the conditions of the job were not made clear to you when you took the job.

As you see, I cannot ask him directly about the follow-up advertisements, because obviously he'd say it's none of my business.

You are aware that he is completely right about this? It is in fact none of your business, and has no bearings on your contractual obligation.

When I eventually talked to him about renewal, his response was: "I'd first like to work with you and see how you do".
  I find this rather sketchy and selfish

Well, I don't. To be frank, "let's see if I have funding" is often code for "let's see if you are worth spending valuable funding on". Strictly speaking, your mentor maybe did not tell you the whole truth, but it's not far off, and it seems naive of you to assume that your ongoing employment will not also depend on your performance in addition to the availability of funding.

When I was hired by him, I was already in my third year of postdoc, and indeed in a top school in the US.

I am not sure why this would matter to your mentor. If at all, the fact that you are already in your fourth year as a postdoc would mean that your mentor assumes that you don't need a long contract, as you would likely be off to a faculty position soon anyway.

it really doesn't give the postdoc a stability.

As I am also a postdoc, I completely understand this point. However, it is important to recognise that postdoc positions are not designed to be stable, longterm contracts. Fundamentally, if you want stability, you will need to find a permanent faculty or scientist position. It is not the fault of your mentor that your expectations are not in line with how the position you applied for is commonly understood.
Somewhat cynically, I am also not sure why you are even worried - you seem extremely confident in your own skills and the availability of funding, to the extent that you are mad at your mentor for not committing to you many years in advance. If that is the case, why do you even worry so much that your contract will not be extended?

Questions: Is he telling me lies? Is what he's doing a standard thing to do?

TLDR: He may or may not be telling you the full truth, but I don't consider his behavior unusual or unethical. Again: did you really assume that your contract renewal only depends on the funding situation, and not at all on how well you do in the first year?

It is in fact none of your business — Strongly disagree.  "Why are you paying me less than you are advertising for other postdocs?" is absolutely OP's business.

Thanks again and agree! I personally feel some (a lot of?) postdocs are being scapegoat because they have no other choices for the moment, and the mentor can do whatever they want to with them.

Is he telling me lies?

From what you've written, no. I could not spot any straight lie. You see that there is more money for post-docs in the group, but that does not imply that this money may be available for your position. Grant money is for specific projects and our boss may have specific plans for the projects. Maybe he already has candidates but he has to post an advertisement by some law (that's how it is for some positions in Germany). Maybe he is looking for somebody with some specific background that you don't have?
Also, he hired you for one specific project, also probably because he thinks that your expertise fits well for this project and he does not want you to work on the other projects. Moreover, pushing you to work fast may be due the fact that the project time is running out and he needs results to prepare a report for the project and he needs results to write a follow-up proposal (both things seem highly likely). Note that there is a difference between "I don't have funding for you." and "A renewal of the contract depends on the outcome of the grant proposal."

Is what he's doing a standard thing to do?

Actually, neither you nor me does really know what he is doing. He probably leads a larger group pursuing different lines of research and this is more complex than many people think. Planning ahead is important and not easy with lots of uncertainty about both funding and available manpower. What is standard, is that people are hired for projects and that project contracts are limited contracts. What is also standard, is that hiring includes some "probation period" (may it be official by law or by contract or only informally) and renewals are discussed timely but not too early. So keeping employees on limited contracts in suspense for some time is pretty usual.
What you can do, is to ask about an appropriate time when he will discuss opportunities for renewals with you. Note that he also may not offer a renewal right away since he expects that you will move on to another position in the near future.

Similar to other commenters, I saw no direct indication of him lying to you. Whether it is a standard thing to do or not is hard to tell as some additional information needed. For example, how large is his group, i.e. how many postdocs, PhD students? Specifically, if his group is large (2-3+ postdocs, 5-6+ PhD students, etc) then, I say, his behaviour is pretty standard. Parallel advertisements would be then for other projects which are within his group's research directions. He may have one particular research direction well covered (by, say, some grant recently obtained) for next few years and only limited amount of money available for research direction of yours.
Imo, parallel advertisements are of your business. However, your real concern is renewal of your fellowship and this is the real topic on which you should ask to be promptly updated by your mentor. In particular, info on continuation/non-continuation of your contract should come to you at least three months before the current end date.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Is it possible to get my habilitation in France while being in industry?
I've finished my PhD in pure mathematics in late 2013 in the US (2 published papers, 1 preprint), and after almost 4 years of postdoc in the subjects of pure math (1 year-unproductive), medical imaging and computer vision (3 years- 3 papers), I'm joining a research position in industry in France. I've done 3 years of postdoc in France (and currently here) and 1 in the US.
I'll be working alongside a professor of statistics in France who's a consultant for my company, and the company also encourages publications (after they get patent etc.). Besides, I'm collaborating with two people from academia and industry, and in 2-3 years or so, I hope to have 2-3 more publications.
My goal is to defend my habilitation in statistics/machine learning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habilitation) in 3-4 years from now, as I'm very interested to have a joint academic-industrial position in the future. To elaborate, I'd like to hold a professor position in academia and also a researcher/research consultant position in industry. I'm happy to indirectly supervise PhD students alongside someone else but not directly. And somewhat shamelessly, I'd like to have a second income from academia on top of industry. I'm not a EU or US citizen, by the way.
My question is: is it possible for me to defend my habilitation in France when I'm not a part of French academia? Normally, I've seen only academics do that.
Thanks in advance!

It's been a while since I was in France, but I remember (part-time) supervising PhD students being an important component of the qualifications for habilitation. Will that be possible in your situation?

@NajibIdrissi: I was hoping someone would ask that! As I mentioned, 5-10 years from now, I'd like to see myself significantly involved in both academic and industrial research in the use of statistics/machine learning and pure math (if needed, e.g. differential geometry) in healthcare related topics.I don't want to supervise students directly, but am happy to be a secondary supervisor in the future. Plus, I think (correct me if I'm wrong!) having an habilitation would improve my academic status, hence I can hold an academic position as well.

@nengel: I edited the question accordingly, please see it. I'm not sure what's legally possible 5-10 years from now. I'd like to be a secondary supervisor of PhD students, but not the main one, as I'd ideally spend quite some time in the industrial research position. Thing is: I'm not aware of the law or rules in this regard. I'm not a EU citizen.

I'm concerned that you would need to be officially co-supervisor of 3-4 students. If you're not in the lab, I don't think this would be good for the students or administratively feasible. But really, the professor you would be working with is best situated to answer these questions!

Yes, you may obtain an habilitation as a non-academic, but in fact you may not need one, see below.
An habilitation is a diploma. You would need to register in the doctoral school of a University, so the right person to ask is the director of the doctoral school. I know at least one person who obtained an HDR while working for a company.
However, it is not a simple matter.
For example, the HDR procedure in Mathematics-Computer Science in Bordeaux has five steps before the defense:

File an application. Note that there are prerequisites, such as mandatory training in directing thesis work.
Evaluation of the application by the doctoral school.
Evaluation of the application by the University Academic Council
Formal response. If the response is positive, the candidate must complete their HDR within two years.
Registration as an HDR candidate and constitution of an examining committee.

Once awarded, and HDR confers the right to be sole advisor of a doctoral candidate. It is a sufficient but not necessary condition for applying for a professorship: formally, the prerequisite is a qualification aux fonctions which may be accorded to non-academics (Appendix 11).
Note that a scientist working in industry may co-direct a doctoral student, if at least one of the other director(s) (there may be two others) has an HDR. I don't have my draft of the décret on hand, but if I recall correctly it is not necessary that the scientist have an HDR.

The academic system in France can be confusing:

In general, the first stage of an an academic career is "Maître de conférences", equivalent to assistant/associate professor. Anybody with a PhD can apply, provided they pass the "qualification aux fonctions de maître de conférence". At this level the academic can already supervise PhD students, but there must be a co-supervisor who obtained their HDR (it's common for the HDR supervisor to play a merely administrative role in the PhD).
The second stage is "Professeur des universités"; equivalent to full professor. Usually academics pass the HDR diploma before applying, and they must pass the "qualification aux fonctions de professeur des universités".

Interestingly, one of the criteria to successfully pass an HDR is to have supervised PhD students (actually to have "co-supervised"). Usually it is also required to have a solid experience in teaching, preferably including administrative duties (e.g. director of studies). Research-wise, the academics I have seen passing an HDR have usually published dozens of papers, some of these with a high citation count.
It's true that industry profiles are encouraged nowadays in academia, but I think it would be difficult for somebody with little teaching experience and a modest publication record to pass the HDR... let alone to obtain a position as "Professeur des universités" (the HDR doesn't give you any position). Additionally, I don't think you could combine the position (and the salary!) with an industry job: as far as I know you can get a sabbatical leave to go to industry for a while, but then you don't get paid on the academia side.
However I would suggest other ways to achieve your goal:

Teaching: many institutions hire industry professionals to teach specific courses (this is called "vacations"). It might not pay a lot but it gives you some teaching experience and contacts in academia.
The Cifre PhD funding scheme [fr] allows a company to hire a PhD student who works part-time in the company while preparing their PhD. The Minister of Higher Education provides a substantial amount of the PhD grant, making it financially interesting for the company. The PhD student has an academic supervisor and an industry co-supervisor: being the industry co-supervisor means that you get the PhD supervision experience and you can co-author more papers with your student.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
I'm going to start my PhD with weak foundation in research
I did my masters in Computer Science last year and it was a taught masters so I didn't do any type of 'Research'. The problem that I encounter now is that I'm going to start my PhD in the next few days and I don't have any idea about how to do it (I don't know how to write a literature review, for example.)
So, Is it possible to do it or will be very difficult in my case? And do you know any books that can help in building the foundation for me to be able to do the research?
Cheers!

Ask your supervisor/advisor.  That is what they are there for!

+1 for what @TaraB says. Now that you're starting a Ph.D, you might visit this site often, and you'll find that the most common solution to questions you'll have is "Talk to your advisor". Don't worry: no one expects you to be an expert in research when you start - that's what Ph.D training is for.

@vahid:  sure, but even there it's probably a very good idea to ask one's advisor for suggestions for what to read.

One tip, do not try to change the world by yourself. Focus your research on something concrete to achieve a small breakthrough. Many small advances that science makes progress. For example (exaggerated), do not try to find a cure for cancer, but attempts to fix some little things that are not yet resolved in the way of finding a cure for cancer.

So, Is it possible to do it or will be very difficult in my case?

Unless the faculty in your new department are negligent sociopaths, they would not have admitted you to their PhD program without a firm belief that you could succeed.
Your lack of research experience could make your PhD more difficult than for other incoming students, but mostly because it will take you more time to settle into a research pattern.  If you want to speed up the transition, get involved with research as soon as possible.  Do not fill your weekly schedule with standard homework- and project-heavy classes.  Sign up for independent study/research credit.  You're unlikely to produce publishable research in your first semester, but that's okay; your primary goal is to develop research habits, not research results.
In fact, I'd suggest getting in touch with faculty in your new department now to arrange for independent study time in the fall and to ask for reading suggestions.  If you know who your new advisor/supervisor will be, ask them first.

And if the faculty in your new department are a bunch of negligent sociopaths: Run, don't walk.

Let me say what I believe in here.  Doing research is a skill you gradually acquire over years of reading,  experimenting and criticizing others work. There is no magic here. If you are dedicated to learn, you will be able to do research. The main keyword here is critical thinking

critical thinking.. so is that possible for people who have mediocre intellect or is it a characteristics of only Intelligent people?

@user3237995 I believe it is possible for everyone.

Even some of the most clever students are completely lost when it comes to starting out with research.
There are plenty of good books out there that provide general guidance on how to get a PhD and conduct research. These are of course no substitute for first hand experience, but they will provide you with a framework within which to conduct your research. As disciplines differ, it is probably a good idea to find one that is written by someone in a discipline close to yours.
Here is one general one that Amazon (and its reviewers) recommends:

How to get a PhD: a handbook for students and their supervisors by
  Estelle M. Phillips and Derek S. Pugh.

There seems also to be such a book devoted to Computer Science:

The Art of Getting Computer Science PhD by Emded Ahmed.

Amazon has no reviews, so who knows what it is like. From what is available on Amazon and Google books, it looks like rubbish. (The title isn't even grammatically correct.)


text:
How to create an editorial board for a new journal
I want to start a new scientific journal. After doing all he initial work about setting up a journal now I want to know how will I be able to create an editorial board?

another journal... Are you sure that your field is not already well covered by existing journals?

Is there a journal on this topic? 2. Could I join its existing editorial board? 3. Do we have to compete with other journals? 4. Why should anybody join my editorial board rather than established ones? 5. Why should anybody submit to my journal? 6. Would I submit to this new journal if I had the choice between this and some other famous journal in the field? 7. Is the reason that this is a niche field with growth potential rather than wanting my own ego-journal? Is this an established field but yet without a journal (unlikely!)? YYY/no special reason (nsr)/nsr/N/N/N - on any match, don't.

does "I want" refer a journal with unknown publisher? Wat's your aim of starting a new journal? Are you super famous?

Recruiting a strong initial editorial board for a new journal is not easy.  There are several important criteria:

You need editors with strong reputations, to attract attention to the journal and inspire confidence that it will be well run.
You need to assemble a group that is diverse enough to cover the full range of submissions within the journal's area of coverage.
You need editors who have enough time and energy to do a good job.  Keep in mind that most of the good candidates are already overcommitted.
You need editors who are committed to the success of the journal and who are eager to inform the community about it and solicit submissions.

Ideally, you have a great idea for a journal that fills a troubling gap in the publishing landscape, and prominent people you mention it to say "What a wonderful idea!  How can I help?"  If that's the case, then you will still have to make wise choices and put in a lot of hard work, but your chances of success are reasonable.  On the other hand, if you have to convince people to join the board, or to restrict your attention to people who are eager to join any editorial board that will take them, then you'll have a much more difficult time.
If you don't yet have enough connections in this field to identify and recruit the right people to join the board, then founding a journal is a bad idea (and it would be wise to wait for a point in your career at which you'll be better positioned for success).  I don't mean to be harsh, but your question does not inspire confidence.  If you do a poor job of setting up a new journal, it will be a negative for the academic community, and it's not easy to do a good job.

After doing all he initial work about setting up a journal now I want to know how will I be able to create an editorial board?

Maybe I'm reading too much into this sentence, but it comes across as suggesting you view the initial work as the hard part.  From my perspective, anything that comes before assembling the editorial board is easy compared with the scholarly and management decisions that will follow.  The formalities of setting up a journal are easy (which is why there are so many low-quality journals); the hard part is building a high-quality journal that that achieves all your academic goals and operates stably and successfully for many years to come.

To operate stably and successfully for years requires funding, and *that" is hard to come by. Juggling all that is where the real work lies, coming up with an idea for a journal, defining a title page, and even finding a decent editorial board, are peanuts in comparison.


text:
Admission into masters degree without partial or full transcript
I'm in a last year of my bachelor degree of science in wildlife management that will be completed in July this year, 2016 at Sokoine university of Agriculture (SUA) in Tanzania. I would like to continue with masters degree especially outside the country but I would like to know if it is possible to apply abroad and scholarships without having either full or partial transcripts because for the time being they will not be already released and if it will it is only partial transcript that can be available on around May this year.

It should be fine; we're aware of the disparity between our application deadlines and your graduation dates. When you graduate you'll likely have your grad-school acceptance (here's hoping!) and you'll have to send an official transcript to that school to confirm your degree.

You can certainly apply with partial/non-official transcripts, adding a letter (hopefully official from your school) explaining the situation. Just make sure to be able to get as full a picture of your grades as possible, the place you are applying to really want complete data that also can be verified.


text:
Is it acceptable to wear the same outfit every day?
I am a male graduate student in natural sciences at a public university. I want to simplify my life a little bit by wearing the same outfit (more or less) every day. (Obviously I would have multiple copies to be hygienic.) I tend to wear untucked casual button-downs with some casual khaki pants and sneakers. Would this be looked down upon by the faculty? I am not so worried about other graduate students, but I do not want to make a poor impression on the faculty. Any guidance on this would be much appreciated!
Of potential importance: I am TAing one class right now and will be taking two classes this upcoming semester.

When I was in graduate school, I taught with shorts and a t-shirt and sandals (and I still continue to do that in the summer — it gets hot down South).  It wasn't uncommon to see others wearing gym shorts when teaching/TAing.  No one ever said anything — I'm in the humanities — but I can't imagine it being too terribly different until you jump into the professional fields (the Pharm.D. here has an draconianly ultra-strict dress code, for instance).

Buying the same shirt in several boring colors works pretty well.  I do not get as many comments about it as people who wear the same color every day.

Some interesting example that even TV hosts get away with this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/30069564/australian-tv-host-wears-same-suit-for-a-year-and-nobody-notices

There was a guy doing his whole PhD and postdoc wearing something that looked like sweatpants, loose t-shirt and a sweatshirt. I haven't met him after postdoc to tell you whether he changed his habits aftwewards. Needless to say, he was a mathematician.

we have same outfit in cllg. That's establish equality and you need not think about what to wear

http://mashable.com/2014/11/17/mark-zuckerberg-and-other-insanely-successful-people-wear-the-same-thing-every-day-and-for-good-reason/#suf6MlcZzuqa
http://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a10441/why-i-wear-the-same-thing-to-work-everday/

There's a professor where I attend school who does that.  No one thinks poorly of it, but it has caused a few students to dress up as him for Halloween.

I'm with AnonymousPhysicist; I have button-down shirts in several colors and rotate them randomly, paired with with khaki trousers (multiple, mostly identical) and tan boat shoes.  I do tuck my boring shirts in, and I wear a tie when I'm teaching, though.

@guifa Well, at least no one ever said anything to you...

@Superbest I mean, I suppose they did, if chili peppers on ratemyprofessor count ;-)

@RubyGemer What is cllg?

Richard Feynman had, while single, until he remarried, identical jackets and shirts, so he would never have to decide what to wear every day. I knew a mathematician who did not change his clothes for a whole year; until the next wash. Obviously, I do not recommend this, but I would consider it extremely inappropriate if someone commented on my clothes (which I vary only slightly for work). I know to dress up significantly for special events, but would consider it nobody's business but mine what I wear for the regular academic workday, as long it is not visually or olfactorily offensive.

The bulk of my wardrobe is comprised of (multiple copies of) xkcd t-shirts, all black but two dark blue ones, which I wear almost all year long. Nobody ever said anything about it, unless they were stopping me to read the comic strip.

Way back in the ancient past, when I was a graduate student, my Ph.D. advisor wore the same thing every day: black suit, white shirt, Harvard tie.  No one complained about that.

Andrew Ng is known for wearing a blue shirt every day. IIRC, his philosophy is that you only have so much decision ability in a day, and if he doesn't have to make a decision about his outfit, there's one more valuable one he can make.

This question really should be ported to Stack Overflow. I myself will rewear clean clothes, especially pants, but I try to not do it two days in a row. Some colleagues it seems will go the whole week on one shirt and I've wondered if that shirt came off at all for sleep or even a shower!

Go for the Steven Jobs look.

You are in good company :-) Note the passage about Obama mentioning research "... that shows the simple act of making decisions degrades one’s ability to make further decisions".

Life can be simplified without resorting to wearing a set of uniforms. While uniform is the ultimate form of simplicity, when your are the only one doing it in a place that uniform is not a norm, people may perceive you wearing the same piece of clothes everyday even you change into a clean set daily. It's easy to explain it to an acquaintance, but difficult to clarify if a professor has decided that you're unkempt. They cannot really come up close and sniff you so visual clues are the only clues.
We can get the best of both world by simplifying the wardrobe while keeping the maximal versatility. One of the common concepts is capsule wardrobe. Here is an example:

By using different combinations one can get different looks from Mon to Fri with only a few shirts and a couple pairs of pants.
Designing a capsule wardrobe does take time but it'd serve you well for a couple seasons or even longer. Tips to make one are available online. Here are some general points:

Plan for the shopping instead of base on impulse.
Decide on a set of color schemes that are easily paired, colors along grey, blue, and brown scales are a good start. I often pick one accent color (currently green) for more variations (e.g. a tie or socks with green patterns).
Start small. For a season, I found 3-4 tops, 2-3 pants, 2 pairs of shoes, and 1-2 jackets seem to do the job quite well. I don't wear suits for the current position.
Buy quality stuff, especially for coats, suits, wool sweaters, and shoes.

It's actually not that difficult. I tried it last year. I cleaned up my closet, and then just find some scheme online that I like and modify them to the colors and style that I wanted. So far I can pick out my clothes without even thinking about it and I never felt I'm wearing the same thing day to day.
Hope this helps!

I love this answer, but I think the wardrobes should be ordered as Wed, Thu, Mon, Tue, Fri...

One of my faculty colleagues who just received tenure (at my r1 university) has worn basically the same outfit (same colored button-down shirt with khaki trousers) for the past decade - from graduate school to his current position (he may have indeed been wearing this his entire life, but we only have data for the past decade). I believe his closet only has one type of shirt and trousers.
Aside from gentle ribs from others about his 'uniform', it's well tolerated by others as it's a minor eccentricity compared to some of the other faculty.  Just be open to someone asking you if you: 1) have multiple shirts or a single shirt; 2) wash them regularly.
tldr: If it saves you money / brain-cycles  / spoons / closet-space to wear the same uniform clothing every day, do it. It worked for Steve Jobs, it can work for you.

Fine print: There may be a gender factor as men in academia and industry who basically wear a uniform are well known but it is rare to encounter women who do the same. This requires more exploration.

I've known a few professors who do this. Never heard any complaints, but that may be influenced by the fact that people tend to assume that I'd consider it silly to worry about that kind of detail. (correctly) Another approach would be to select only stuff that matches and blends well s.t. any permutation works fine. You can still just grab the first things and go, but others don't need to know. If you're bashful about this (as the question seems to imply) that might be a more comfortable approach.

Washing your pants is for squares. Real hipsters join the six month club.

@Corvus six month hipster club? They need to man up to the lifetime club: http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/05/30/levi_s_ceo_chip_bergh_tells_fortune_people_shouldn_t_wash_their_jeans_university.html

Some women in my department wear a "uniform" of jeans and solid-colored t-shirt (and a sweater in cool weather.) I think a uniform is pretty well-accepted regardless of gender.

While its generally fine to have your 'uniform', just note that you'll need to break it sometimes (you don't want to wear khaki trousers to a black tie event).

@ff524 - I know women who wear nearly the same style of clothes every day, but I don't know of any women who wear the identical clothing every day such that people around them wonder if they ever change/wash their clothes or if their clothing rack is monoclonal. This was the status of my colleague above until we established that he really only wears a single type of shirt and pants, identical in all regards, every day.

I think the social norm in the US is to never wear the same clothes (or in your case, clothes that look the same) on two consecutive days, especially if you want to appear professional (or what passes for looking presentable in the academia). That being said, if you don't see your advisor or students on a daily basis, you might get away with it, as people may assume that did change your clothes on days when they didn't see you.
But really it is not difficult to have two or three different sets of outfit and "rotate" through them. As I've learned, people don't care about whether you washed your clothes before you wear them again two or three days later (as long as it isn't too dirty), as long as you change your clothes daily. An anecdote to illustrate how easy it can be: I once had a math professor who would wear almost the same plaid shirt everyday, except for the fact that all of the shirts are of different colors. I suspect that he just ordered every single color available for that one shirt he really liked.

Shirts are the most important for having your slight differences: pretty much nobody will notice if you're wearing all identical khaki pants or jeans.

I understand the prejudice if reusing clothes goes to the level of being literally unhygienic, but I have never witnessed such actually reaching that point, and really, forcing everyone to alternate outfits or else deeming them 'unpresentable'?  What good is it to anyone?  Do most people do it just because they can (get away with it)?  Isn't it about time that someone (and why has no one yet successfully) did something about this judgementalism based on the most superficial/visual traits rather than silently letting it go unopposed?

@Vandermonde Wow someone's got a sense of social justice... Shame on me for sanctimoniously conforming to the totally outdated and discriminatory social norms about the so called "proper" clothing practice.

Well, as it stands the situation is like the peacock's tail or prisoner's dilemma.  Although some uncharitably call us hobos or flood victims or some combination thereof, I do my part to dress comfortably and as I please, and some of my similarly more idealistic colleagues are joining the mild martyrdom in order that we might one day come to be viewed as normal.  Don't complain; the lower standards will make life easier for you too. ^_^

@jakebeal as some empirical evidence, I once had two of the same t-shirt and wore them after each other (this was in 6th grade, US), and kids freaked out. Later I wore the same pair of pants for a month straight, only using Febreeze to keep them smelling fresh. Not a single comment was made.

I think the standards in academia are much looser than the standards in the business world. So bear in mind that when you get out of school and get a job -- assuming you get a non-teaching job -- you're going to have to upgrade your wardrobe.
Still, if people think you're wearing the same clothes for weeks at a stretch, some number will think that's distasteful. I think the simple solution is to have two or three different colors and alternate.
Personally, I have several white shirts and several blue shirts, and several dark blue pants and several gray pants (and I think one khaki). And I just make sure that when I change clothes, I put on a different color than I wore the day before.
Unless you have some reason why you want to look exactly the same every day -- you consider this an essential element of your personality or you swore an oath on your father's grave that you would always wear the same colors he was wearing on the day he died or whatever -- I just wouldn't. Many won't notice, and most who do won't care, but some number of people will thick you look grubby, and one of those might be someone whose opinion is important to you.

"some number will think that's distasteful" -- if in fact you're wearing clean clothes every day, but they think you never change your clothes, then that could eventually provide for them a valuable learning moment as to why they think it's so important when in fact they can't tell the difference between "grubby" and "same colour shirt as yesterday". Whether you want this valuable moment for them, to come at a cost in suspicion directed towards you, is another matter ;-)

"assuming you get a non-teaching job -- you're going to have to upgrade your wardrobe" - unless you get a job in the software industry.

@SteveJessop Sure. But when your the undergrad assistant or the young guy at his first day on his first job, that's probably not the best position to be pointing out the foolishness of your seniors. There are times when you should stand up for principle no matter the consequences. But this isn't a principle I'd want to fight to the death over. There are times when it's just good manners and good sense to go along.

@NicolasHolthaus you were probably speaking in jest, but even in the software industry there are jobs where you're expected to wear a suit and tie even as a junior. Especially banks can be notoriously rigid about these things.

@NicolasHolthaus Sure, there are jobs with very lax dress codes, so I suppose it's an exaggeration to say that ANY job outside academia will require a wardrobe upgrade. I suppose people who clean sewers are not normally expected to wear a suit and tie.

I think there are two issues to consider here:

Are the clothes clean? That's the gold standard here. People might look more closely when you wear the same outfit every day, but if the clothes are well-maintained and don't smell (let alone stink), you should be fine.
Do you own that you wear the same (type of) clothes each and every day? Seeing it as "is it acceptable" (by others) ignores that your attitude influences how others perceive you and your clothes. If you are insecure about it, others will notice and it might become an issue. If you own it, I don't think you have much to worry about (and like others have written, some highly creative people did the same thing, so you're in good company).

Hmm, also, going by this PhD Comic, there's also dressing for the job you want. ;-)


text:
Are Honoris Causa degree worth as much as PhD?
Lately I have seen that some people (some ex-presidents in my country and some others) have been getting the Honoris Causa degree from some universities. Some of which have never even gone to University.  I would like to know how much is that degree worth. By "worth" I mean compared to a normal achieved PhD, can an Honoris Causa graduate give lectures at a university? Can that person be called a doctor at all? Is it possible for one to get an honorary degree in science, or engineering? How much demonstrated work would it take to get one?

An honorary degree is not a replacement for an actual education.

Isaac Asimov was awarded fourteen honorary doctorate degrees from various universities. I think he deserved most of them. I believe the reasoning behind giving him them was something like "well he DID write our science textbooks..."

@HannoverFist Asimov also had an actual PhD in biochemistry.

Worth how? The only example you show ("can you give lectures?") is not very useful, since you can give lectures on an university without having any PhD (it's the university's decision). This is as much a question about the worth of "a PhD" as it is about the worth of "a honorary PhD". Is "Nuclear Physics PhD" worth as much as "Theology PhD"? What value do you put on being a PhD in the first place? You have to be a bit more specific :)

@Compass No degree is a replacement for an actual education :P At best, it's complementary.

Think of it like being knighted. How good do you think Sir Elton John is with a sword?

Your question relies on a wrong assumption. A PhD does not worth anything on its own! Most people awarded with a 'regular' PhD can not give lecture at a university...

@Daniel That's a great analogy. (only that even "regular" knights were probably not all great with the sword, it being an inherited title and all)

@Daniel Knighthoods have had nothing to do with fighting for about 400 years. Professional standing armies mean that knighthoods have been purely honorary for a long time.

"compared to a normal achieved phd, can an Honoris causa graduate give lectures at a university?" Having a PhD is not a requirement for giving lectures at a university: anyone who is invited to give lectures can do so. Although most professors and lecturers do have a PhD, it is, again, not necessarily required. It's also common for people to be invited to give occasional lectures based on their expertise. For example, my comp sci degree included a short course where local entrepreneurs were invited to speak to us about various topics related to running a start-up company.

Nelson Mandela got so many honorary degrees he hired somebody to keep track of them.

To summarize everything said on this thread, the answer is no.

I think your question indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of what a honorary degree is, and who gets one. Fundamentally, an honorary degree cannot be compared to a regular PhD. All the rules for getting a PhD fly out the window, as do all the perceived benefits for doing a PhD. If you get an honorary PhD, nobody will suddenly assume that you possess the subject knowledge of the holder of a regular PhD.
Similarly, you seem to assume that an honorary degree is somehow an easy way towards a PhD. This is not the case. By and large, by the time you get an honorary degree, you either already have enough degrees or you will never need one again in your life.

Can that person be called a doctor at all?

Yes, as long as you don't pretend to have a "regular" PhD.

can an Honoris causa graduate give lectures at a university?

Sure. Everybody can give a lecture given that he gets invited or appointed to do so. In the usual case, somebody important enough to receive an honorary doctorate is also somebody that an university would love to get for a lecture.

Is it possible for one to get an honorary degree in science, or engineering

Sure.

How much demonstrated work would it take to get one?

Usually none.

The last "Usually none" sounds somewhat misleading (to me at least). I was under impression that honorary degrees are often (although not always) conferred to prominent scientists (think Nobel-prize-winners level) in which case there certainly is a lot of demonstrated work done.

Some universities give an honorary degree to every commencement speaker, who might well have done nothing but be famous.

Not even that. We gave an honorary degree to a commencement speaker whose main distinction was that for several years he was the CEO of a company notorious for its terrible service. At least he spoke for free.

Many professional areas have university accreditation requirements that relate to academics having PhDs in the relevant area. I wonder whether honoris causa would satisfy these?

@JeromyAnglim That seems exceedingly unlikely. Aside from that, the only fields I know around here that formally require a doctorate for something  are  Medicine and academia, and in both cases HC would certainly not qualify.

"If you get an honorary PhD, nobody will suddenly assume that you possess the subject knowledge of the holder of a regular PhD" - thanks to TV, it's a common misconception outside of academia that people with honorary degrees have done the work (not necessarily for a PhD, but for some sort of degree), just not within the confines of a college/university

You'll sometimes see the phrase "earned doctorate" used to distinguish between honorary doctorates and conventional doctoral degrees.  e.g. an advertisement for a university president might state that candidates for the position must have an earned doctorate as one of their qualifications.

An Honorary degree, which is often, but is not necessarily a doctorate, isn't really an academic degree in any sense, and shouldn't be viewed as such. They're usually given for making a mark on the world in some way - be it scholarship, public service, etc.

can an Honoris causa graduate give lectures at a university?

Do you mean teach classes? No more likely than any other member of the public that has achieved a bit of notoriety. Universities occasionally have noted writers, figures from the business community or industry scientists teach, and they don't necessarily have PhDs. If you genuinely mean give lectures - of course, as anyone can give a lecture at a university, if they're invited to do so.

Can that person be called a doctor at all?

Yes, though trying to obfuscate that into "looking" like a PhD or MD would make me think much less of that person.

Is it possible for one to get an honorary degree in science, or
  engineering?

Yes. These are often given to people who have made significant advances in science or engineering - for example, you might give one to a Silicon Valley-style tech entrepreneur even if they haven't done graduate work. Alternately, I've seen them given to people with science or engineering PhDs recognizing work to advance science generally.

How much demonstrated work would it take to get one?

There's no meaningful "Do X, get an Honorary Degree" threshold. It's not something you work toward, it's a recognition from a university that they think what you've done is worthwhile.

A slight disagreement: anyone can get hired to teach classes.  One does not need to have an honest PhD for this (or even to be a professor in many departments).  E.g., I think it is relatively common for successful writers to teach classes.

You might run afoul of actual laws trying to act like an MD if you only had an honorary degree -- I can't imagine those degrees are accepted as medical credentials.

"looking" like a PhD or MD would make me think much less of that person. Performing as an MD without having/being one is illegal in many countries.

@Mast Yet there are aspects to being an MD besides practicing, and that's what I'm talking about.

@Kimball You're correct, and I'm tweaking the answer slightly.

@cpast: If you're referring to practicing medicine, then no, an honorary degree is definitely not enough.  But it's also important to note that a "real" MD is also not enough -- board certification is required.

As Compass states, an honorary doctorate is not a formal credential of any kind. It can be awarded by a university on the basis of one's works and achievements, and does not require a thesis or other publications or research contributions.
Consequently, honorary degrees do not carry the same privileges as a traditional degree. You can list it as an honorary degree, but you shouldn't use it to claim you're a "Doctor." And it certainly would not satisfy the requirements of having a PhD or equivalent in a faculty search.

The answer is in line with this short document about honorary doctorate guidelines randomly found online. Shorter version: "purely titular (...) confer no rights on the recipient and carry with them no formal academic qualification" and "use of the title ‘Dr’ before their name is restricted (...) may not be used within the broader community".

It is usual to give e.g. visiting heads of state high military/civil medals, some insist on getting a honorary PhD instead. I.e., it might just mean "came to visit".
Or the university could decide to give somebody a honorary degree for academic contributions. In our case a Dr. hc to a colleague (who long ago moved back to to Germany, now retired) who essentially founded computing here in Chile (in particular involving what later became our department in a central rôle), and over the years helped to nurse it along.


text:
How to deal when submitting an extender paper to a journal from another editorial?
My situation is pretty simple, years ago I submitted a research article to an IEEE workshop and it got accepted. Actually I have made an extended paper of it and I am considering to submit it for a non-IEEE journal. I have read the information for authors of the journal which I plan to submit, and it does not say anything about extended papers. So I was wondering if I:

Should I ask first if they accept extended papers before submitting my article to this journal?
Should I just submit it and also include the original article from the workshop and point to them that is an extended article? This just in case that the submission site has an Observations or Aditional Sections part where I can explain this. Or maybe should I put a small presentation letter stating that I am submitting the original article from the workshop and the extended paper?

Which would be the best course of action?

That depends on what you mean by "extended". If it just extends the results of the conference presentation, all you have to do is to state this in the introduction and cite the previous paper. If "extended" means longer than the page limit of the journal, it is very probable that it will be rejected outhand or only accepted for further consideration if you cut it down to size. You might try to ask for leniency from the editor, but only after doing a serious effort to make it fit (perhaps by dividing into several?) and have good reasons why it can't be shorter.

Fully agree. .   If you are still in doubt, best to ask the editor first. Otherwise you risk to spend energy in a paper which will not be accepted


text:
What relevance do law school grades have on admission to a Master's degree in economics?
I am currently a rising 2L law student who passed up an opportunity to do a joint JD/MS in Economics. I didn't think I was adequately prepared to take on the Economics degree, though. (Not enough math background.) I am considering pursuing a master's degree part time after finishing law school, though, because it seems to be more interesting and more valuable in the job market than law.
What bearing will my law school grades have on admission to a master's program, and would that calculus change if I took the requisite math courses (Calculus I, II, and potentially III,), as well as a remedial stats course?

The effect of your law grades probably depends a lot on the program you are applying to. I guess (really just a guess here) the overall GPA might in most cases serve as a signal for being a good/bad student, so they probably matter.
I think it doesn't really matter what the courses are. Most law courses have nothing in common with economics courses even if they cover the same topics. And to be honest, people are lazy and probably are not try to figure out which of your courses are useful for an econ degree. That is of course different for a law/econ master or a specialized econ master.
However, most master programs require you to have a sufficient knowledge in math.
But, as I already said that depends on the university/department/program.
So, my advice would be: ask the top 1-3 universities on your list what the necessary conditions are.
A minor remark: I can't think of my econ MS being useful in a real job (i.e. not governmental or in academia) but maybe that is just me. Maybe don't pick a research master's degree.

The most critical law school grades for you are those that have a bearing on economics. Contracts, come to mind, and maybe public policy. In your shoes, I would concentrate on doing well on these, as well as "corporate law" courses. In an application/cv, I would set the GPA in these courses apart from the rest of the law program in say criminal or civil procedure, torts, etc.
Math courses might have a similar impact on your application as "commercial" law.


text:
Dealing with emails that could be interpreted as being endorsed by you
Student A had an examination the other day for a course that he liked very much and by a professor that he admires. There were only 4 students in the course.
After the examination he opened his email and saw that another student B sent an email to the professor including:

"It was a difficult examination.  I hope you will consider this as
  our excuse for leniency. We all did the examination entirely on our own.
We hope you have nice afternoon and the next month brings you a pleasant surprise just like we expect a pleasant surprise from
  you due soon!"

(the bold letters were not bold in the email, I just highlighted them for focusing)
Clarification: The email of Student B to the Professor was CCed to all the other Students, including Student A.
There was not any prior communication between students A & B about letting student B talk on behalf of student A.
Given that the examination participants were just a handful, Student A feels deprived of his right of self-expression, not to mention that having somebody telling to the professor that he wrote the examination on his own can be considered from ridiculous to seriously insulting.
What do you think is the right way for student A with respect to his typical relationship with the professor? Is just "letting it go" the best option? Is any kind of "corrective email to the professor denying the representative mentality of Student B", even in the mildest way overreacting and drawing attention when it is not needed?

What does it mean that you know "he opened his e-mail and saw an e-mail from student B?" Was that e-mail formally cc'd to you? Or were you hiding behind the curtain in your professor's office when he was opening his e-mail?

@Penguin_Knight I added the clarification in the question. The email of Student B to the Professor was CCed to all of the other Students, including Student A.

In that case, just forward that e-mail back to only the professor, and simply state that B's e-mail does not reflect your opinion. Best to leave it as is. But you may also comment that the exam was indeed fair. Remember, just the professor; don't hit "Reply All" unless you want to teach student B a lesson, which probably is not your main goal. And what are all those "surprises" about? That's just a plain dumb way to bribe.

The title of this questions appears unrelated to its content.

Student B is certainly making a fool of himself with this email, but student A seems not to be explicitly cited. I would just ignore the whole thing.

How many other students are there? In a class of 3, this could be interpreted as person B speaking on behalf of everyone; in a class of 300, that would be implausible. This would affect whether I bothered to make my objection clear.

4 students to be exact.

Problem is solved. No worries at all. Thank you for your comments!

I would probably follow @Penguin_Knight's advice on this case. The whiff of bribery, and the fact that B felt the need to say "we did not cheat" makes me wonder if something fishy is going on. Better to be on record as dissenting. That's my view, anyway...

@gerrit could you please suggest a new title?

The blurb you cite sounds to me, frankly, quite ridiculous. What what the fine point being made? It sounds like a rather dangerous innuendo. It could be interpreted as a sexual advance, an attempt at extortion, collusion, etc. It's just very dangerously worded. I'm at loss how anyone in a graduate-level course (I presume) would ever write something like that.

With a class of only 4 students, the email could be interpreted as being sent by the entire class. Normally in this case, the names of the 4 students would be listed in the email.
For a larger class where it is obvious that the email is form an isolated student the best thing to do is to drop it. Making an off hand comment about how crazy the student who sent the email will only put the professor in an awkward situation.
For a small class, a simple email, ideally just to the professor, but reasonably cc'd to everyone, would be to say that student B does not speak for you.