superhamdi

Dealing with the vast openness that is 'work' time in graduate school is difficult to grapple with. I am on the verge of completing my MA and so can speak to the issue of class work load (things will only open up more after course work is completed and it is just you and the dissertation for 3+ years). I had 6 hrs of class/week (three 2hr seminars) and often found it difficult to develop a standard work routine. There are many ways to go about it and here are two:  either try and make sure the days when you have seminars are work days, i.e. you are putting in a concentrated 2-3 hours of work on each side of the seminars. Or do the opposite. On days when you are in class take it easy and focus on being fully cognitively present in the seminars and use days when you are not in class to do the majority of your work, i.e. 5-6hrs. I have had numerous conversations with professors over the years and they have all stressed the same point: whatever you do, treat graduate school like work. BUT something new I have discovered this year is that 'work' doesn't mean 8-10 hr days. Some people can do this, but not many. The consensus opinion in my MA program and in my undergrad was to attempt to put in 4-5 REAL hours of work every day in which you do some good philosophy. That means disconnected from the world, you and your work WORK. I would ask those who object to my advice to consider this interesting point a friend of mine raised the other night: those who are privileged enough to study philosophy are often times individuals who do not work well under the standard conception of work, i.e. 9-5 jobs. Perhaps when some of us are lucky enough to get a job then a return to the standard work day will be inevitable. But in graduate school, it is almost impossible to operate under such constraints. 
 
Hope that helps a bit. 

Dal phDer mentioned what the undergrad students were wearing that might be poor choices and it made me think of something I think is soooo important- in academia at 9 am or at the club at midnight:
 
DO NOT wear shoes you can't walk in.  It doesn't matter how cute the kitten heels, 5" wedges, or pointy boots might be- if you look like a flamingo with a bladder control problem because you can't walk in them, don't wear them.  I see younger girls doing this all the time but older women occasionally as well.  I wear heels most days and am pretty comfortable with most heel heights, so it's not like I am anti-cute shoes or anything. I simply don't think women realize how strange they look though when they have this footwear problem.
 
For those wanting/needing to wear dressy shoes and heels but have not done so much in the past I offer the following advice:
 
1. When shoe shopping: try shoes on in the evening when your feet are a little more swollen and tired.
 
2. Wear shoes around the house to break them in.  People at home might make fun of you but if you live with them you probably know them well enough to throw something in response. 
 
3. Try to wear them out of the house on a few short trips before you try to pull a whole day in them. Sometimes it takes 2 or 3 hours for that weird blister to show up. What sucks is when you end up with 8 hours after that wearing the same pain monsters.
 
4. If after all of this, they still hurt like a mothergoose, they are probably just crappy shoes.  Give them to your sister. Or someone you don't like.
 
5. If you abolsutely LOVE a pair of shoes but they kill your little toesies, you can try this trick:
 
A- Put on cute outfit and your amazing new shoes, pour yourself a drink
B- Call your friends and invite them for a girls night out, pour a drink while you wait for them to get ready
C- On the way out the door, check out your outfit and your sexy shoes in the mirror and take a quick shot
D- Immediately upon arriving at a bar/club have a shot with your friends and listen while they compliment your shoes
E- Dance, take a shot
F- Repeat step E any desired # of times
 
The end result is a hell of a hangover and some nicely broken in shoes.  The trick is to reach the point where the booze cancels the pain.

If I get into the program I'm applying to, I'll be 26 when I start. I feel a little behind sometimes. In my department in undergrad, around 60% of the students go straight into graduate programs, most of them doctoral programs, and many of the ones who don't are just taking a token year off and may not even be earning a full-time income. I always sensed an idea that we should be above pursuing anything besides our own research interests. However, I was just over it. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life, I wanted OUT of the academic bubble as the attitudes were driving me nuts, and I felt this driving need to travel. So, I did other stuff for a couple of years, including moving abroad and working in a business-y field at home, while thinking about what I want. And honestly, I don't think I would have been equipped to make a good decision about my professional future when I was 21-22. Not that no one can, but I learned a lot about what I love and hate to do by trial and error. I had seriously considered being an EFL teacher as a way to travel and I HATED teaching. What if I had gotten my masters in it instead of trying it out through a crappy low-paid job instead? I wish no career dissatisfaction on them but I often wonder about the 40% or so of my classmates who went straight into PhD. programs immediately. Did they seriously think about themselves, what they want in life, and come to the conclusion that an academic career was the best route to it? Or did they just think about what they like to study the most and apply to a PhD in it, and may regret it someday when they realize their personality would be better suited to business or teaching children or sales or whatever else? This happens quite a bit with doctors and lawyers who just chose one of the default options for high achieving students.

While I do feel behind sometimes, and emotionally it's a little rough to meet people who have already made a career of their passion or received a graduate degree by my age, or even to pass people studying in a coffee shop, I also try to remind myself that I'm not really behind. For a 2010 liberal arts graduate I'm doing pretty damn well -- I've lived in a few cities and two countries since graduation, I'm paying my own rent (without roommates!), saving some money, and working in a "real" career that has a good outlook, it just isn't everything I want in life. Yeah, I could be graduating with my master's this summer, but I could also easily be working at starbucks and living with my mom.

Regarding finances and logistics, I may complete part of my degree part-time as a working student but I do plan to be a full-time student and live on loans and savings for most of it. I know myself and I have a hard time balancing studying and working. I think it would ultimately pay off more for me to immerse myself in as many opportunities as I can in my field of study than to do the coursework and not have time for much else while working an unrelated job. I work in recruiting and I see a lot of resumes so I know how drastic a difference this can make in someone's career path. Whether you make yourself into a stellar candidate with internships, research, and networking or simply show up and complete the coursework can make a difference in your career for decades.

I'd strongly advise against attending EGS if you want your degree (and by extension, you) to be taken seriously.

Or you could also enrol yourself in such PhD programs that does not require a complete engagement. And, one school that might be a suitable avenue in this regard is European Graduate School in Saas-Fee, Switzerland, in which classes are conducted only during Summers, although one remains a full time student. Given your interests in metaphysics and phenomenology, and the fact that you already have a PhD, it will not be difficult to secure admission into EGS as long as you can pay the fee. In your situation (as far as I would recommend) you can pursue your (academic) career in your primary field at the moment, so that you are both pursuing your career and your academic interests. EGS (although it has of course substantial drawbacks as well) hosts some of the leading thinkers, such as Jean Luc Nancy, Agamben, Negri, Hardt, Zizek, Badiou, Ranciere.
 
This is what probably I would have done in your situation. But, at the end of the day, you are not me, and I am not you!

Not sure if anybody's seen this but it had me in stitches! These are really, really true!
 
http://memegenerator.net/Scumbag-Analytic-Philosopher/images/popular
 

Not sure if anybody's seen this but it had me in stitches! These are really, really true!
 
http://memegenerator.net/Scumbag-Analytic-Philosopher/images/popular
 

I've accepted my offer at Boston University (off the waitlist). It was a rough season for me, but now I'm thrilled about how it turned out.

Well, then let's start a shame campaign for the same reason against UCLA. They did the same, and it costs $100 for international students to apply to their school ($80 for US people I think). Schools like that just make the chaos around April 15th even worse than it would already be.

(I guess it's not exactly the same as with Vanderbilt, but in no way better: they just didn't respond at all until yesterday. When I solicited an answer earlier, it took me 5 emails and more than two weeks, just to get the answer "you're not rejected, but also not accepted at this point of time").

UCLA has an awesome program though, so let's keep the shame campaign to their admissions procedures.
 

But if we publically shame Vanderbilt, then soon they will have to reclaim their name, only Vanderbilt will be able to call anyone a Vanderbilt, and there will be Vanderbilt walks to overcome the stigma.

"Mere hours before the deadline" was a bit of an exaggeration, but still, 2 days before the deadline?  C'mon.  It seems very rude to me.  When each applicant is paying ca. $100 per application, I think a timely response would be not only courteous but deserved.

I'd go with LMU, especially if cost of living is not an issue. Boulder is a great school, but they accept both Phd students and MA students (and most likely give more attention to the Phd students). This is by no means a deal breaker-but to me it seems like you'd have to do more to stand out at Boulder as an MA student than you would to stand out at LMU. 

I looked over CUNY's recent graduates and placement pages awhile ago, and I was struck by a few things. One, they don't have a spectacular placement record. Two, a lot of their faculty doesn't seem to advise dissertations. In fact, I don't remember seeing a lot of the bigger names listed as advisors.

Notre Dame rejected people with 4.0 GPAs and great GRE scores. Guess that shows how difficult grad school is to get into or the importance of  letters and a great writing sample. 

Well, looks like UC Irvine and UCSD have started sending offers! Good luck to anybody who's waiting to hear from them. Hoping this means UCSB contacts me soon!

A lot of people have compared this process to dating, and the relationship with your adviser is similar to marriage. It makes sense that a lot of it will be based on gut. 
 
For me, I am trying to decide between two top 4 schools, and all of the objective criteria can be basically assumed to be the same, like funding, education and such. The biggest differences are the advisers and the projects, which comes down to which one I would enjoy the most, which comes from gut. You need to be with an adviser you like and treats you well, working on a project you are passionate about, in a city you enjoy. Otherwise, you won't be happy, and if you aren't happy you are likely to not complete your PhD.

I suppose there's no harm in applying to these "continental friendly" Leiter programs. It very much sounds like you could be happy in one or all of them.
 
I would strongly suggest, however, that you also apply to some strong continental programs that aren't mentioned in Leiter. You're incorrect when you say that Kentucky and DePaul have no one who works on idealism and Adorno. Kentucky has Arnold Farr and DePaul has Bill Martin. The University of Oregon, another top-notch continental strong-hold that Leiter wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole, has Rocio Zambrana, who specializes in Hegel and The Frankfurt School.
 
Basically: 1) By all means apply to these Leiter programs. 2) Do not ONLY apply to such programs. 

Personally I would not have accepted an offer that did not include a full tuition waiver and some sort of stipend.  However, everyone's financial situation is different.  It seems unlikely to me, however, that one would be able to be successful in a philosophy PhD program if one is working an additional job for any significant number of hours during coursework.  So, if it were me, I would take the funded offer with no regrets.  BUT, it's not me.
 
Congrats on the offers, in any case, and rest easy in the knowledge that none of us will get jobs no matter what school we attend.

by my math, it would take 35-40k or more in loans to afford brandeis and the boston cost of living, even with the two scholarships and two or three TAs.  just can't justify that compared to the full tuition and stipends offered elsewhere.  as good as brandeis's placement is over the last year or two, it's not head and shoulders above other leading MA programs.

I was talking to a theater major friend.  He's had some serious problems marketing himself (not that he's too good at it to begin with...), and some of the blame may be pinned on employers viewing 'artsy' majors as strange, haughty, not demanding and so on.
 
 I think there are a fair amount of employers that look favorably upon a philosophy major.  But I speculate that the vast majority of employers don't really understand what it entails.  Let's face it -- philosophy is an esoteric field. 

Lol. Amazing, if true.

To those who were wondering: Yes, I do plan on reapplying next year, if I get shut out this season--though I'm going to have to sit down with my supervisor and look more carefully at where to apply. My problem right now is (1) finding something relatively productive (and hopefully interesting) to do in the next year (other than working on my apps), and (2) figure out a Plan B in case I get shutout again (I'm not going to apply a third year). I'm hoping that the answer to (1) will contribute to solving (2).

In any case, this will all be moot if one of my remaining apps pan out. But, I think that there is still a discussion that philosophers and those who aspire to be philosophers need to have here, given how competitive the field is (even just getting into a PhD program is brutal, nevermind finding a job after), and how (reportedly) terrible the job market is. The fact is that the vast majority of those who did a BA in philosophy will not (due to a lack of either luck, talent, or desire) end up becoming professional philosophers. Many of the talented, lucky few who get into PhD programs will not finish, and of the small fraction of students who will, many (most?) will get drummed out of the field after bouncing around for a few years as adjuncts. However, at least to me, it's not obvious what else one can feasibly do with a philosophy degree other than go on to another professional degree like law. And I don't think that this is due to a lack of imagination on my part. It's just not a topic that gets much attention in philosophy departments, for whatever reason, despite the fact that these are questions that most of us with philosophy degrees will inevitably have to answer.

Why care about leiter rank if you're doing continental? I don't do continental, but my understanding is that those who do discount or ignore the leiter report.

As my advisor put it, "this is a lottery you want to play. the payout is well over a quarter million dollars (tuition remission and stipend) and your odds are far better." So, who cares what you paid up front. As long as you get in, you wont care in the least.

I've got CUNY and UMass as maybes still because CUNY hasn't waitlisted anyone and the only two UMass admits both received the Puryear, making me think they might be waiting for funding details before admitting more. Toronto is probably a rejection, but maybe a waitlist? No way to tell. UCSB is killing me.

Honestly, I'd be cool with any acceptances. I'm optimistic about getting accepted off the waitlist at BU, less so about Maryland. It'd be nice to know something definite about my future, though.

Just accepted to Boston U. Finally an acceptance!