bar_scene_gambler

Yep. Couldn't be because I find Post-Structuralism interesting...you know, like I said in my comment. Couldn't be that at all. It couldn't be the case that I'm applying to Emory specifically because I might want to do work on Deleuze. Yep, you've got me figured out dfindley. Great work.

I would definitely do the Kaplan for the math. I bought both the Princeton Review book and the Kaplan math book, and the Kaplan math prep is better by far.

You know, even the greatest philosophers start by writing about others. Deleuze didn't start doing "his own" philosophy until he'd already published works on Hume, Leibniz, Nietzsche, Bergson, and Spinoza. Before you can do your own philosophy, you need to understand the philosophy of others. Maybe you feel like you get the people you're writing about, but your brief sketch of your chapter on politics says you at least misunderstand Nietzsche. I know none of this will matter to you, for several reasons, but perhaps you should think about deepening your knowledge of philosophy before going out on your own. We don't work in a bubble; philosophy is a conversation, one which has been going on for hundreds and hundreds of years, that you can either be a part of it or not, but if you choose not to be then don't expect others to listen to you. You aren't getting any respect here because you don't respect others, and you don't respect philosophy. I don't understand why you're rushing to develop an innovative system anyways. It seems forced. Philosophy isn't a young-person's field; it's certainly no coincidence that so few philosophers write their magnum opus early in their lives. I fully expect to be learning and writing about others for quite some time, and that will make me a better philosopher because, rather than forcing something into existence, I will be giving myself the time I need for something truly good to come to me. Honestly, for someone interested in Eastern philosophy, it astounds me that you're so anxious to publish something groundbreaking. What do you think wu-wei is about?

I'm glad you enjoyed my drunken ravings. I was touched by Philstudent's post, so I just wanted to talk to you guys/gals a bit more. I'll absolutely answer these questions for you. 2) Like I said, I'm currently working on a paper on the concept of exemplar, specifically exemplary educators. In Schacht's "Zarathustra/Zarathustra as Educator" he claims that Nietzsche believes that our educators need to be exemplars, but his usage of the term is a flawed one I think. Really the problem is the same one that Kant has in his Critique of Judgment, specifically the unteachability of genius, I'm trying to say that both Kant is right about our ordinary usage of the term "exemplar" and that Schacht uses the flawed understanding of exemplar to teach Nietzsche, but that Nietzsche's understanding of exemplary educators is quite different than our ordinary understanding of the concept. Hopefully I'll finish it in time to submit to journals/conferences. 3) I'm interested in a wide range of topics, including American and German Romanticism, Nietzsche, Chinese Philosophy (mostly Gongsun Longzi and Zhuangzi), Kafka, Camus, French Phenomenology/Post-Structuralism, and more recently, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, and Cavell. It's safe to say that I'm almost totally interested in Continental thought, so I'm applying to (mostly) continental programs, but I'm also applying to some analytic programs as well, as I would like to be a more rounded philosopher. I'm also applying to Chicago's Committee on Social Thought, as my interests are quite broad and cross the boundaries between literature and philosophy. 4) My writing sample is a paper that I worked on in a graduate level course on Kant's ethics. It's main goal is to show that, separated from the usual caricatures and underlying prejudices of Western academia, Eastern philosophy can be read as rigorously and as deeply as and Western philosopher. As such, my paper tries to draw similarities between Kant's duties of respect to others and various passages out of the Tao Te Ching. The point was to make the comparison as drastic as possible for maximum impact, and though the comparison is, obviously, imperfect, it turns out that the two areas of thought aren't as mutually exclusive as I thought they'd be. My PS is also fairly generic. I pretty much did what you did, except for Chicago's programs and Georgia State. The Committee on Social Thought wanted a personalized letter explaining your intentions and your trajectory, so I had to write that one from scratch, and I wrote another statement from scratch for the philosophy department, as I wanted it to be genuine and not cut/pasted. Georgia State had an additional requirement in the PS that asked you to explain why you want to get an MA, so I obviously had to write something extra, in addition to the tailored concluding paragraph. 5) Like I said, UT Austin, U Chicago, and U Warwick are my top picks. I'd like to work with Robert Pippin, Kathleen Higgins, or Keith Ansell-Pearson ideally, but Jessica Berry at Georgia State is also pretty good, from what I've gathered from our emails anyway. Of course, Pippin is my top pick, so if (and that's a big if) I get an offer, I'm immediately accepting the Chicago offer. From what the grad students told me on my visit, I might have a decent chance, but who really knows at this point? 6) Currently I'm considering doing something with Nietzsche, perhaps a continuation of my thesis. But as we all know, interests change, so it might not end up going in that direction.

Same. Better scores might have helped my application some, but it's a bit late now. At any rate, I used Princeton Review's GRE Prep Book. It was pretty good, and the Verbal prep was really well done. It also had various studying strategies and such to help you get the most out of the book.

Caveat Emptor: I am somewhat drunk on Ouzo, so feel free to ignore questions you don't feel like answering. I've noticed that there is a drastic difference between the amount of conversation between last years grad. student hopefuls and this year's. As such, I wanted to ask a few questions of the few that are wandering around this forum. First, I'd like to say that, much like Philstudent1991, I find that I'm incredibly attached to you guys. I hope that you all find placement within the programs that you apply to. Second, are you guys working on any last minute projects? I'm working on a paper regarding the concept of exemplar and it's use in language (related to Nietzsche in Schopenhauer as Educator and Kant in his Critique of Judgment). I was wondering if you were working on any interesting projects as last minute CV boosters. If you want (though I'm sure you're familiar) I could send you guys some links to conference/publication info. Third, I'm really interested in your personal interests philosophically. I was wondering if we could all talk about our interests concerning our philosophical goals and how they relate to the programs we're applying to. Fourth, could we all talk about our writing samples and statements of purpose a little? I feel as if transparency is at a minimum these days (though we're all familiar with dfindley's writing sample/statement of purpose). Fifth, where are you looking to go, and who do you want to work with? I'd like to go to U Chicago or UT Austin and work with Pippin or Higgins. What about you guys/gals? Finally, I was wondering if you guys/gals had any idea what you're dissertation might be on? I know this isn't particularly pertinent in terms of applications, but, ideally, I'd like to be able to follow your work as you move forward, and as such, I'd like to know what it is that lights your philosophical passions (metaphorically speaking). I say again, forgive me for my drunkenness. But could we form tighter-knit cadre? We may not all have the same goals, in fact, we may not all have the same beliefs, but we do all share in one thing; this awful process. As they say, there are no atheists in foxholes, and likewise, there ought be no opponents in these applications. Ideally, I'd like you all to be my peers. In fact, I'd like you all to be my friends/colleges, even if I don't make it into a grad. program this year. Likewise, if I make it into a grad. program, I'd like to be able to help you all out, given the difficulty of grad. applications. I try, after all, to be pluralistic and not to favor analytic or continental one way or the other. Could we help each other out? Maybe we could form a critique/suggestion group for personal statements/writing samples. I know I still have to submit approximately 8 applications.

That's very sweet of you philstudent. I'll be sure to post if/when I receive letters of acceptance.

Oh thank you! I almost had a heart attack.

I haven't gotten one yet, so either I'm out as well or the emails haven't gone out yet.

^Ditto. Thanks for adding another voice of reason ancientatcontinental, and well said.

Some do. Georgia State has a very detailed breakdown of the average stats that their admitted students have. They might be comparable, given that it's a difficult MA program to get into.

I just sort of fell into continental philsoophy before I knew of its existence. We had philosophy courses at my high school, and so I took the equivalent of an introduction to philosophy before I entered college, but they never taught us about the analytic/continental distinction. I fell in love with Nietzsche, and the rest is sort of history. The university I'm currently attending has great faculty who work in both areas, and they're all open-minded, so there's not much in the way of fighting over the distinction, so they just sort of let me develop. To be frank, I'm interested in things outside of continental philosophy as well, it's just not my main area of interest.

Not really, considering that it's not really as simplistic as you make it seem. I'd be more concerned with a writing sample that has a whole chapter devoted to "Nietzschean" conception of government. It's almost as if you've never read any of the myriad polemics against political entities which are spread widely throughout many of his works. I wonder what Pippin or Leiter might have to say about, "public education is prioritized as primary, and a fair socio-economic system is taken for granted as a matter of course." given what Nietzsche has to say about education and, again, his polemics against government. It's almost as if you've never read Nietzsche before.

I visited and spoke with several grad students at Chicago a few weeks ago, and the environment is, at least, according to the grad students and the feel that I was getting from the department, a good mix of both analytic and continental philosophy. They take their Cavell, Wittgenstein, Nietzsche, and Heidegger all very seriously there. It's a strange place, but I really appreciate the openness to both traditions.

I'm sure most places "at least skim" the writing sample. The point is that it is just skimmed during the first round. OP's stats will get him through the first round at most places, and from that point they weed people out based on writing sample. If you want to be competitive at U Chicago, you'll have to have decent stats and, not or, a good writing sample. If you're serious about applying to U Chicago, then you'll also need to pick a chapter of your book, as opposed to the whole thing. I was told explicitly that they're fairly strict about their 20ish page requirement and won't read much more than that. There are just too many applicants.

dfindley man, did you even read the process on U Chicago's website? They don't even carefully examine the writing samples until after the first cut was made (which at Chicago, apparently, is 250 applicants). That means that they eliminate a little over half of the applicant pool before they closely examine the writing sample. Then, only after they've made that first cut and closely read the writing samples, do they narrow down the applicant pool to 20 people. At that point they begin the tie-breaking stuff. U Chicago is a highly respected program, as I'm sure you know, so it's safe to assume that most applications processes are similar, if not exactly the same. They even say, and I quote: For obvious reasons of efficiency, the grades and scores are looked at first; but the letters of recommendation in every folder are at least skimmed. "At least skimmed". That's how they classify the care with which they examine your writing sample before making first cuts.

Clever title. My guess is that there's a lot of overlap between the 300 applicants that each department cites, which is to say that if someone thinks that they're capable of getting into a top 20 department, they're probably applying to several top 20 schools. So there probably aren't as many as you think. And besides, that "300 applicant" thing is pretty universal. Georgia State had a little over half that apply last year, and that's just an MA program. Competition is going to be tough regardless of the ranking. As for where they are, my guess is that they're spread out over sites like this, philosophy forums, places like reddit. That, and some probably don't feel the need to discuss their applications with others. As for competitiveness, who can really say? There are probably many applications to top 20's that aren't competitive, but I'm willing to bet that at least a quarter of them are. It doesn't really matter to me one way or the other, because the type of person who is looking at a PGR top 20 program isn't going to be competing with me for a spot anyways. They'll most likely have strongly analytic interests and won't be looking at places like U Chicago and Emory.

It's really not worth it. The talk gatewayselect posted was very enlightening, and I think it's fair to say that this is a case of terminal crankage. Just let dfindley do his thing, because there is absolutely no convincing him that what he's doing is the wrong way to do philosophy. He will continue to be blinded by his own sense of self-importance, regardless of what we say to him.

dfindley, of course writing ability is important in any graduate program, I don't think anyone would argue that that isn't the case. But the reality is that any application will be judged based upon content other than just the writing sample. While a good writing sample might save your application in some cases, it can only do so much, and I'm simply not convinced that, unless you have some incredible extenuating circumstances, it will save yours. That is because your other stats do not instill a sense of confidence in your ability to do the necessary grinding that it takes to get your PhD. Graduate school is about more than just research and dissertation work. It's also about teaching, coursework, and other forms of training, in most cases both pedagogical and linguistic. All of those things require an applicant who is capable of doing the grind, the hours of studying and working with faculty and other students, and that requires a tremendous amount of physical and intellectual stamina, things which the GRE, GPA, and faculty recommendations are supposed to help gauge. In another sense, I would be a bit concerned about your attachment to your work. The visceral reaction that you've had towards criticism (I can only guess because your posts have been edited for vulgar language) and that fact that you honestly believe that a department will 'encourage' you to apply tells me that you have a bit of an ego, and though we like to think that philosophy is just a whole group of egos battling it out, the truth is that you'll need to detach yourself from your ego and your work in order to mentally survive graduate school. Whether you like it or not, you'll be working in an environment where people will inevitably disagree with you, and quite often will be highly critical of the work you are doing. You'll have to work with faculty and other graduate students who will be critical of your opinions, especially at the highly analytic environments which you plan on applying to. So I would take seriously the suggestions that we've made and think about applying to an MA program first. Of course, in the end this is just advice from some random stranger on the internet, so take it for what it is, but I only say these things because it is in your best interest to be aware of them. I am not personally attached to the success of your applications, but you should be aware that you will, in all likelihood, be wasting a large sum of money by applying with the stats that you have.

I'm going to be honest with you, unless you're book is really good, and I mean really good, the chances of you getting into any of the schools that you've listed are almost non-existent. You may be right that many of the 4.0 students that they admit end up with a poor dissertation, but the capability to write a good dissertation isn't the only thing that departments are looking for. They're also looking for someone who will be capable of doing the required coursework, someone who is going to be able to make it through the 7-8 years that it takes to get out with your PhD. Programs are investing a lot of time, money, and resources into their graduate students' educations, and they aren't doing it for the sake of charity. You need to reflect well on the department, academically and otherwise. With that said, what does your application say about you? From an unbiased perspective, as someone who has never heard of you or read your book and knows nothing about your particular circumstances, I can tell you several things. Your low cumulative GPA tells me that maybe you don't do so well in non-philosophy courses, which wouldn't normally be such a red-flag, except that it's a fairly low cumulative GPA, which might indicate to me that you aren't a very good student (either you don't study or don't do your work or some combination of both). Your low philosophy GPA is an even bigger red-flag. It tells me that you haven't done good work in your courses, which could mean a number of things. It might mean that you don't write well, it might mean that you don't participate, or it might mean that you don't put effort into your courses. This is corroborated by the fact that you only have one faculty member at your university who is willing to write a recommendation for you. It tells me that you might not have done very well in your classes, and that there is a distinct reason why only one faculty member is willing to recommend you. It could also mean other things. Best case scenario, you don't actively participate in the departmental culture, worst case tells me that you don't get along well with the faculty at your institution (another important factor in the application process). Your average GRE score, along with the other negative factors, tells me that you probably don't study. This is a major red-flag, because you're going to have to do some coursework at the graduate level before you even get to your dissertation. Will he even be able to make it past your comps? These are the sorts of things that will go through the committee's mind as they review your application. The reason why GPA, GRE, recommendations, and other such materials matter is because they can get a sense of the type of student that you are. They aren't worried about admitting someone who can dedicate the time to write a dissertation. That's what they teach you when you get there. What they're looking for is someone who can think innovatively, while still being able to do coursework and do what it takes to get to the point where they can even begin their dissertation. The GPA, GRE, and recommendations are metrics used to figure out what kind of student you are, not what kind of philosopher you might become. So, if your book is good, and I mean really good, then you might try applying to the schools that you listed. But they are, for the most part, the best of the best, and they're looking for the all-around best candidate, not the candidate who excels in writing but is a poor student. You need to get through your comps before you can even begin writing. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, I'm not trying to be. I just think you should be realistic about your application materials. Maybe you should try an MA program before applying to some PhD programs. There are many great MA's that fund.

dios Achilleus, the spreadsheet is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsJrSSHnssqFdHNPell4VVZwWDgtWUpQcTVVeWM0bWc&usp=sharing#gid=1

Yeah, I'd look at the Splintered Mind stuff. That's how I figured out what to write, and his advice seems pretty solid.

I just included my philosophical interests and why I wanted to study at that particular university. If the university asked any specific questions, I adapted my SOP, but besides that, I kept them all the same except for the last paragraph (which is where I spoke about my university-specific interests). I tried to keep it as simple and straight-forward as possible, though I've only applied to two programs at the moment.

Well said philstudent. My GRE scores aren't that great, but I haven't worried about it. Poor GRE scores can be overcome if you have a good writing sample and good recommendations. Those matter more in the long run anyway, and they tell the program more about you as a potential graduate student. Focus on what matters guys/girls, because we don't have much more time.

I've already submitted 2 applications. I'm not entirely sure what the normal submission period is, but I can't see how it would hurt to submit whenever you feel ready/confident in your application.