philstudent1991

All great advice! But I think you meant Georgia State

Sorry Establishment haha I'm out for the day! It's not letting me quote people for some reason.

I'm not in a PhD program, so I'm interested in the question more broadly. Thanks Establishment!

Does anyone WITH EXPERIENCE have anything to say about this? I'm wondering if anyone that did an MA then went to a PhD had any luck getting any MA seminars to count for distribution requirements at their PhD, even if it was just one or two.

Ok this is getting off topic lol. Recommendations in metaethics, continental, phil bio, thanks so much

Yes, nietzschemarket is right that my interests are each independent of one another, though I see why TheVineyard identified phil bio as an outlier. The synthesis between my interests, if there is one, is how the study of evolution can impact philosophy and especially ethics. But I think it would fall short of the truth to just label that as bioethics, because a scientific analysis of evolution, which is central to my interests, seems very clearly to fall into philosophy of biology, if not purely biology.

I know this is a ways off but I wanted to post while a lot of people are still on here. It appears like I've probably struck out in my PhD apps, but I am in at GSU and am very excited about the opportunities I'll have there. I think my biggest weakness was pedigree and unknown letter writers, and GSU will hopefully solve that problem and make me damn competitive in a few years (GPA and GRE are excellent, and hopefully I'll have a strong MA GPA). So, I was hoping I could get some recommendations on schools to have my eye on in a couple years when I apply to PhDs again. My primary interests are metaethics (particularly moral skepticism), ethics in general and philosophy of biology, with a lesser interest in continental (Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Camus, Marx). My tentative list as of now is Duke, Texas, UCSD, Vanderbilt, maybe Berkeley, maybe Stanford, maybe Wisconsin, maybe Arizona. I know there is a wealth of knowledge in this thread and I hope you guys and gals can give me some good recommendations! Thanks!

I don't think publications are common enough to be a factor worth trying to say anything about in your survey, not to mention it's impossible to measure their quality in a survey format.

This is a great idea! I'll be happy to contribute as much as possible

Berkeley rejection

As high as possible of course, but I've seen people get into top schools like Harvard with 155, 156ish

I can say from experience that a 169, 170 verbal doesn't guarantee a damn thing, and a lower verbal doesn't disqualify you. Also, a lower quant (155 or so) doesn't disqualify you, and certainly a high quant doesn't guarantee you anything. But to future applicants, I would say that you are really not doing yourself any favors if your verbal isn't 160 or more, and it would really be best if it was 165 or more. Others can comment if they feel that my comment is fair.

This is probably what solves the problem. I'm surprised I got such insightful comments haha

so I thought I'd ask some smart people to weigh in on this.... The "typical use" efficacy rate of condoms allegedly hovers around 80%. This means that out of 100 times, 20 times you will get pregnant, right?. Or, out of 5 times, you will get pregnant once. Since many sexually active couples have sex at least five times and many only use condoms...and by those numbers their chances of getting pregnant is 100%.....why does it not happen more often? Why do people even buy condoms? I'm not understanding this at all...what am I missing?

Duke released rejections, though I think the rejects already knew for all practical purposes

If you feel this PhD program is where you'd like to end up anyways, I'd definitely take the offer while you have it. The only case I'd think about doing the MA is if you want to get in to a "better" PhD program later.

It is likely at this point I will be shut out of PhDs, but I got in to a good MA so that's where I will likely be going

I'm curious.

There would indeed be cases where it would make more sense to go to the MA. Which cases those are, however, I think only you can decide.

I was if you don't end up with an offer, it's because competition is just so ridiculously tough these days, not because you weren't a great applicant.

I've skimmed all the samples that everyone has posted. Everyone's is well organized, well written, and deals with a complex philosophical issue from a mature perspective. I see why admissions is so competitive

You didn't use subheadings? Dang your apps were sunk from the start.

Yes, but really research where you would be a good fit. Don't be a dfindley, and apply to the top schools despite weak everything. Research and see what makes a "strong" applicant. Believe in yourself and be confident, but realize that many applications are over 100 dollars each, and you shouldn't apply based on a whim or on unrealistic expectation. But like philosophia said, miracles do happen. You miss 100% of the shots you don't take, etc. etc.

I would start with DePaul, Vanderbilt, Emory, Stony Brook, Fordham...those seem to be the main ones people are interested in, though of course others may think of places I didn't mention.

However, this is one of the shortcomings of the PGR. P1. The primary thing most students should probably be considering in choosing a school is placement (if they want to make a career of philosophy). P2. The PGR doesn't factor placement into the rankings C: and thus the PGR doesn't factor the primary thing most students should probably be considering in choosing a school into the rankings Leiter acknowledges this, saying that placement is backward looking, which is true. It's just important to realize the PGR is not, and does not claim to be, the end all be all source of information.