> As someone with a PhD in mathematics: absolutely not.
I'm blown away by this statement. Maybe math is an amazing haven of curiosity, and if so that is good to know. But academic credit is half the damn currency of science, and it is 100% the main reason that many profs are willing to take a pay cut. This is something openly joked about by people at all levels in my department (biology), and of what I know from some physicists I am close to it is not great there either. Though this could also have some subfield dependence.
In biology tenure is hardly a direct benefit anyway because there's nothing much you can do without grants, and no one wants to stop being thought of as productive/smart. People chill a little after getting tenure, but only because 50% of them are basically fired at that decision point. Tenured faculty absolutely still play the grantsmanship game hard in biosciences.
I suppose in mathematics there is not as much impact that university status can have, because way less upfront money is needed.
My area was computer science and from my personal experience I saw a lot of what you're talking about. These people are hyper competitive and sunk a good chunk of their young adult life in this stuff. It is at that part a big part of their identity. There are easier things to do, it's not like tenure at a state university salary is some big prize for someone who is competitive at a top department--they have the smarts and drive to have much better salary and plenty of job security elsewhere.
I knew plenty of people who were total maniacs after tenure, it made no difference. Lots of people slowed down a little, but only because they were so fried.
Most research I've observed is still safe and boring (IMHO) because it's more likely to land papers and grants. No one uses their tenure to really do anything daring hardly--you can't, you'd fuck your students. They still need publications! So we were all in a never-ending publishing grind. With or without tenure it never ends so long as you still have students and care about their future.
I'm blown away by this statement. Maybe math is an amazing haven of curiosity, and if so that is good to know. But academic credit is half the damn currency of science, and it is 100% the main reason that many profs are willing to take a pay cut. This is something openly joked about by people at all levels in my department (biology), and of what I know from some physicists I am close to it is not great there either. Though this could also have some subfield dependence.
In biology tenure is hardly a direct benefit anyway because there's nothing much you can do without grants, and no one wants to stop being thought of as productive/smart. People chill a little after getting tenure, but only because 50% of them are basically fired at that decision point. Tenured faculty absolutely still play the grantsmanship game hard in biosciences.
I suppose in mathematics there is not as much impact that university status can have, because way less upfront money is needed.