PerpetualApplicant No More

Ask your letter writers who they know at Texas, and see if they'll call or email one of those people to sing your praises. In your situation, I'd only do this for Texas. If I understand the Wisconsin wait-list correctly from other posters, 'being in the top 5, which are unranked' means being the top student in your area, broadly construed. Say they categorized you as a LEMMing. Your admission is then entirely dependent on whether a LEMMing holding an offer turns down his or her offer. You can't go up on the list--the person above you is holding an offer, and they are contractually obligated not to revoke it until April 15--but pestering could, in theory, move you down. Edit: Good luck!

I thnk objectivitycontradiction and MattDest are both right. Contacting POI's while wait-listed will not help (and if you come across the wrong way, could hurt) your chances. However, there are situations in which it is still very worthwhile to do. Specifically, if the DGS/DGA told you it's ok AND you think it would help you make your decision to talk to your potential professors, then you should do so. But it's something that will help you make a decision, not something that should be done to try to move yourself up a wait-list (get your professors to try to do that, if anything). Edit: I think what I'm really recommending is that one should contact their POI's at a school where he or she is wait-listed iff 1) you are weighing that wait-list against other offers and 2) subsequently, you feel like it won't be the end of the world if that wait-list doesn't work out because of something you might have done in communication with your POI. If either 1 or 2 is false, then you still have something to lose by doing so. Edit 2: (My thoughts are not so organized today). In regards to OP's situation, I would refrain from attempting to build relationships at this point; it will come off as though you're trying to up your spot. This seems particularly unwise at Wisonsin where, if I recall correctly from other posts, you are in the first quintuplet of the wait-list, which I would read as meaning the top student in your area, broadly construed. What I would do is try to get just as much information as you need to figure out if you'd prefer an offer from Texas or Wisconsin if both were made, such that, if, say, Texas calls you on the 15th and makes you an offer, you know right away whether you can say yes immediately or whether you'd want to say "let me get back to you by the end of the day" and then frantically start calling people at Wisconsin.

I can confirm that someone in my MA program got one.

I think they accept applications until 4/1 or 4/15 (if it's 4/1 and you really want to apply, I'd bet you can contact them and work something out).

This. tl;dr Context sensitivity is great, and different situations have different expectations/involve different sorts of social interaction. That said, I'm not going to post on this particular topic in this thread any further; while there is nothing inherently wrong with the topic, *this is not the place for it.* If anyone wants to continue discussing these issues, I suggest they start another thread for that purpose.

In addition to what zizeksucks said, I think there are valid reasons for making the group private: 1) Independent of whether anyone posting is actually a misogynist or not, there's a value in having people who all agree on a basic set of issues communicating in private, so that the discussion doesn't get derailed into, e.g. a theoretical debate over what and what does not count as misogyny (a totally random example ). 2) Even if it were desirable (which I doubt it is, see point 3) it doesn't seem possible to make the group "female applicants plus a certain subset of male applicants who 'get it'" (i.e. won't derail the discussion, question the presuppositions, etc.) so a female only group it is: how would someone determine which male applicants are not going to violate confidence, make the space feel unsafe, etc.? 3) Hell, even as someone who considers himself a staunch ally, I'd feel uncomfortable joining the group: what if I act on some implicit bias of which I am not yet aware (and thus haven't yet de-biased myself from) and end up making someone uncomfortable? That'd defeat the whole purpose. So, my two cents as a male applicant are similar to Zizeksucks'--I support the group. But, of course, I also support anyone's decision not to join it for whatever reason, as PhDApp has chosen to do.

I was guessing you were his/her TA...

I'm glad I was able to be helpful! (Also: why do all my upvotes come from posts where I give advice based on how I screwed up in the past? ) I think Aduh is right that I was pessimistic--but intentionally so. It seemed as though you are looking to make a thorough list of the pros and cons, and, as many other people here have been emphasizing the pros of choosing Tufts, I felt like it might be helpful to list some of the cons as well. Either way, I hope your visits go well and I hope your decision ends up making you happy!

Your app would likely be stronger if you succeed at Tufts (i.e. get almost all A's). Here's the thing: 1) You aren't guaranteed to succeed at Tufts. Many people straight from undergrad struggle at the grad level at first; if you're already in a Ph.D. program, they will help you along and not care if you get B's in some classes your first year. Getting B's at a M.A. program *really* hurts your application (I had to enroll in a second one and get a bunch of A's several years after to erase mine!) in two senses. First, in terms of the grade itself, many adcoms read less than A grades as "this person is not ready for our Ph.D. program" (Schwitzgebel said something to that effect in one of his many posts on the topic). Second, your letters will suffer. This may be more important, especially given that you will no longer be able to use your undergrad faculty as letter writers (at least not for more than one, and even then, it should be supplemental). Doing so will be seen as an acknowledgment on your part that you were a sub-par student at Tufts. 2) Succeeding at Tufts will be a lot of work, and most Ph.D. programs will likely make you take classes when you get there for two years. So you'll be doing a lot of extra work for a shot at better placement. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, just be cognizant of that fact in your calculation. 3) Even if you do excel at Tufts, again, there is no guarantee. So you'd be doing this for the likelihood of doing better, not the fact that you will--it is entirely possible you would do worse. So, I'm not saying you shouldn't do it--I quite honestly might in your situation--but rather there are negatives that you should take in to account when making your decision.

Thanks for the feedback--I agree. Fortunately, they just responded and said they'd be happy to have me visit. That said, I stressed in my email that I wanted to visit to compare them to my other offer, not as some (misguided) attempt to boost my application. I'd recommend this tactic for anyone wait-listed considering asking about a visit (as long as it is actually true for you!).

I think this is really spot on. I have a question in that I'm in a situation that is similar in many respects but distinct in one salient one, and I'd love to hear some thoughts. I'm in a similar situation in that I have an option with which I am very comfortable at the moment (Riverside). And I have a school where I've been wait-listed that may or may not be a better fit (CUNY). There are a lot of considerations: CUNY is higher ranked, but I think my dissertation committee might be even a bit better at UCR etc etc. So, like you, "I would hesitate to accept an offer to a program where I haven't met anyone, gotten a feel for the program, its milieu, etc." Thus, I think it'd help me a lot to visit CUNY, in order to decide if staying on their wait-list is something I really want to do (viz, if I would take the spot if offered it). Where my situation is dissimilar is that I haven't received an invitation from CUNY saying they'll foot the bill. Fortunately, the money itself isn't an issue in this particular case (I have family near NYC who would be thrilled to see me and help with the costs). But I do worry about some of the points raised by TheVineyard given that I haven't been invited as you have. On the one hand, I kind of don't care--I'm not going to make an impression, and if they hate me, so be it, I'll be happy at Riverside! On the other hanud, I don't want to shoot myself in the foot by simply asking to visit. Any thoughts are appreciated.

I want to synthesize a few pieces of disparate advice here. One poster said you should wait until after your first year at GSU to think seriously about this, as your interests will solidify and one might become more important than another. I largely agree with this statement, though I think there's another way in which your interests might solidify. Specifically, I think you'll have a great chance at GSU to find out what particular aspects/viewpoints of various fields are the ones you want to focus on, and that will help you make your list. For instance, as is evident from this thread, different scholars at different schools conceive of the domain of general topics like 'philosophy of biology' and 'bioethics' quite differently. Thus, just looking for people who study phil bio per se might not get you a great match. I study naturalistic mind, but I know at this point I'm much more into empirical-naturalist theories rather than Sellarsian normative/putatively naturalist theories. So, as great a school as Pitt is, my app would get thrown out because I'm such a poor fit for the sort of mind done there by McDowell, Brandom and Haugeland (Edouard Machery would be a good fit for me, but he's in HPS and is the only one). This thread makes the point really well (unintentionally) about how varied phil bio and bioethics are, but I'd bet the same is true for your other interests as well. That said, your interests do kind of scream "BU" to me.

No, but if it's not you, I'm totally rooting for ianfaircloud.

Me three. Form email from Carol Gould (I was in the bcc field). I think I'll stay on it for now, though I may remove myself at some later point (I'm not sure if I'd take the offer over Riverside, which I loved when I visited, but I'm not sure I wouldn't, either).

Thanks--I just got back from visiting and had a blast! (And I probably met your friend--I met almost everyone). I'm actually pondering whether or not I should withdraw one or both of my apps to UConn and CUNY. Philly is kind of dirty, but somehow, that's part of its charm. The food is fantastic and the museums are great, though I can't speak to the symphony.

I've only been Chicago once, but from what I understand it and Philly are actually really similar in a lot of ways ('blue collar' reputation and sports fanaticism come to mind). You should probably learn to like Yuengling though (I don't know if it's still the case, but it used to be that you could go to a bar in Philly, ask for a 'lager' and they would know to give you a Yuengling).

Yeah, but you get to live in Philly, which may well be the best city on the east coast (it's as fun as New York and as cheap as Baltimore). P.S. I'm a native Bostonian. P.P.S. When you visit, if you eat meat, go to Koch's Deli on 43rd and Locust. It's seriously better than the famous New York delis (2nd Avenue, Carnegie, etc)

A philosophy of cog sci reading list (very tentative--please feel free to add in comments): Background: Davidson "Essays on Actions and Events" Fodor "The Language of Thought" Anything by Dennett from 1969-87 Classical Theory Fodor, "Psychosemantics" and "The Modularity of Mind" Churchland (Pat) and Sejnowski, "The Computational Brain" Newer Theory Bechtel "Mental Mechanisms" Noe "Perception in Action" and "Out of Our Heads" Shapiro's reader on Embodied Cognition Theory of Mind Goldman, "Simulating Minds" Nichols and Stich"Mindreading" Philosophy of Psychology Griffiths, "What Emotions Really Are" Relevant Theoretical Cog Sci/Psych Marr, "Vision" Pylyshyn, "Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not What You Think" and "Computation and Cognition" Sperber and Wilson "Relevance: Communication and Cognition" (it helps to read some of Grice's stuff in language first) DaMasio "Descartes' Error"

Agreed. I just wanted to try to jump-start the discussion into returning to putting together such a list. I'll have to think about it for a bit, but I'll try to add a few of the more influential empirical mind/cog sci books later. ALSO: Stupid upvote quota.

Vitriol aside, I really do think Stich's "Fragmentation of Reason" is a significantly better discussion of the relationship between epistemic processes and evolution than "Warrant and Proper Function," and I'd like to re-iterate that point independent of anyone's views on Notre Dame philosophy generally. I agree with what you say about the other three books, though.

His point is that van Inwaegen's metaphysics is unrelated to his theological work to the extent that it can be taken seriously by naturalist metaphysicians on their own terms. The same is true of, for example, his discussion of Frankfurt examples in the moral responsibility literature. I do however agree with you about "Warrant and Proper Function," which is not a great book in and of itself, and seems mostly aimed at forcing analytic theology into epistemology. Stich's "The Fragmentation of Reason" does a much better job discussing many of the same issues.

1) My impression is that for top ten phil programs you don't need letters from Block, Fodor and Jesse Prinz saying you are the best undergrad they've ever seen. Maybe a letter from one of them saying you are great, and a letter from someone slightly less well known saying you are the best? But I'm honestly not quite sure on thish point. 2) MSTP programs are distinct from--and more difficult than--MD and/or MD/JD admissions.

It's not a humanities program, but Medical Scientist Training Programs (combined M.D./Ph.D.) are actually even more competitive than philosophy. My father works on the adcom for a fairly high-rated program, and says that to be admitted, one needs three letters from eminent faculty at a *very* well-reputed undergrad institution (no second chances by doing a MA) that basically say the student is God's gift to science.

Three offers seems really low for UConn compared to past years--do they not have many spots this year, or are they planning to make another round of admits prior to sending out wait-lists?

I am in at UCR; my interests are (empirical perspectives on) mind, psychology and psychiatry, and moral psychology/agency. At this point, UCR is my only offer and seems like a great fit; I will therefore likely be accepthing the offer.