How to deal with disagreement with advisor regarding research proposal and direction?

I have regularly had problems with my supervisor regarding scientific direction. I have always known that I write much better than I speak. About 6 months into my PhD I reached the conclusion that its possible that I am not able to coherently convince my supervisor regarding my ideas and reasoning.

This has in fact been pointed out to me by my PhD advisors and also the examination board. In their words, I have an extremely unstructured, abstract and convoluted line of thought. Although, I may reach at the same conclusion, my process is not easy to understand for other people.

So what did I do?

I adopted the show them before telling them process. So whenever I wanted to introduce new ideas to my supervisor, I would generate data for the same, create a presentation and then speak to them. This mostly meant that my supervisor got the point.

In you case, that may not be possible because your application is due in 5 days.

In that case, I would suggest you write up an alternative draft containing your vision of the proposal. Do this, but also complete the proposal your advisor wants you to write. Before submission, when reviewing the drafts send both proposals to him in a politely worded e-mail asking him to review both.

This is general advice and may or may not help in your current situation. Especially since time is short.

But mostly it is a warning that fighting with your advisor is not often a path to success. Ideally you want to graduate and make your own career untethered to your advisors and their ideas. You want to make your own way. But the realities of being a doctoral student are that the advisor has a lot of influence over and impact on your future - at least initially. Most places, they need to affirm the quality of your work, which means, generally, that they agree with it. Fighting with them doesn't get you there.

There are ways to avoid fights that may be open to you. One is to just go along with the advisor's view until you have the opportunity to substitute your own. Many do this successfully. Others cannot for various reasons. Another way is to find a more compatible advisor, even if it means changing universities, perhaps even starting over. This is an extreme step, of course, and causes disruption. But sometimes it needs to be done for ethical or even psychological reasons. If you are so strong in your views and will not yield, then you are probably better off finding a different path to success as it may not lead through this advisor. Whether yielding in the short term to enable long term success is at all attractive only you can say.

I'd suggest also, that making it a formal fight - going to higher authorities to impose your will over that of your advisor is probably the least safe option. You may win the battle, but be sabotaged for the rest of your career if the advisor also has a personality that will not yield. Try not to get into such a situation. It isn't likely to end well for anyone.

It is possible, for some students and in some institutions, to work completely independently of an advisor.

Finally, I suggest that you look for what seems to you to be the least disruptive path. You know the situation better than anyone here, but beware of the career destroying actions that might lie along the path.