greencoloredpencil

I think this attitude is probably pretty common but especially since I lurk more than I post here I'll voice it. At first the guy was hilarious. I'd like to read his posts for fun until he started cursing at others, being misogynistic, and displaying all sorts of other unacceptable behavior. He was entertaining at for a while but I do enjoy reading the topics even more since he's been gone.

You only check your email like 50 times a day? I probably check mine closer to 70.

Was UC Riverside's deadline also early January last year when they released results so early?

But wasn't Riverside's deadline on the 5th? Wouldn't this be a little soon?

I'd like to add to this, however, that having a strong mathematics background could help compensate for a low GRE math score. Otherwise I agree.

I used to be a math major and I've found that my background has helped me quite a bit. I am interested in very analytic areas of philosophy though.

I know what you mean, Berkeley vacillates between my first and second choice program. Thankfully my other favorite program seems to notify quite late! (I say thankfully since I find this psychologically helpful). Most of the programs I have a better shot at apparently notify in February so if I don't get any notifications then I'll be a little discouraged

UCR or Berkeley probably

February 3rd (First Monday of February)

My guess is that some people just don't realize how different admissions are by subject/field. They likely feel like what they did made for a really strong application and are just trying to "help" others based on their own experiences not realizing that it won't work for another field.

What if this doesn't work? I've got 3 letters in everywhere and have a guy writing a 4th to all programs that accept more than 3. I've considered removing him as a letter writer...

catwoman15, I want to better understand your position so I have the following questions. Consider a case where person A from an historically discriminated against population uses a slur word against a person B from a privileged background. Or perhaps assume a case where A holds beliefs about B just because of B's background. If I'm understanding correctly, these are cases of "reverse-racism." They are not cases of racism because there is no power structure present. However, cases of reverse-racism don't exist. But how can this be? You just identified these as cases of reverse racism. I'm sure you don't mean to say that cases like these never happen so I'm trying to figure out what you mean by identifying an act as "reverse-racism" and then saying that "reverse-racism" doesn't exist. Do you mean to say that these cases have no moral weight? Do you think that A has done anything wrong? Lastly, if we stipulate that racism/sexism involves a power structure then it follows definitionally that there can be no cases of racism/sexism without a power structure. Is this what you mean by saying that "reverse-racism" doesn't exist? This alone would be uninteresting though, since it merely follows by definition. The interesting part would then be what your argument for defining racism in this way is. Could you elaborate a little or point me toward some articles/papers that argue for such a definition?

I'd like to endorse this wholeheartedly and add that it's been my advice from several professors that I showed my SOP to for advice. In short, I was told that I was spending too much time on the SOP when I was worrying about tailoring it uniquely to each school. As Matt noted, there's plenty of room for argument in the exact order of importance of application components, but generally most agree that the SOP ranks pretty low among them. Of course one doesn't have to have a completely generic copy-paste statement for each school, but minor adjustments in emphasis/highlighting should do. Especially considering that you should have picked schools in the first place that were a good fit for you, the SOP you write should be appropriate for all of your schools barring the types of adjustments mentioned.

I'm very sympathetic to your viewpoint as well.

I'd like to third this. I've been told by many professors and grad students that it really comes down to luck even when your application is very competitive. There are way more qualified applicants than spots for them, admissions committees vary and some will care more about certain factors than others (eg some might take the GRE very seriously, others might not), and of course it depends upon the other applicants to that program that year. Maybe you might not want to call these extra factors that are out of your control luck, but it's certainly not the case that you can count on getting in for having a strong application.

February or is it March?

GRE math score

I'm having this trouble with exactly half of my letter writers (and yes that means I'm submitting an even number of letters to many programs, ie 4). Though, I'm not sure if some have simply procrastinated or if the ones who relatively quickly submitted letters wrote less substantive ones. Though all of my professors seemed to indicate that they felt they could write strong letters.

I absolutely love the tractatus, it's my favorite philosophical work I've ever read actually! I'm very interested in representation in general, but especially when it comes to language. I quite enjoy his picture theory. As far as ethnomusicology, I'm interested in non-western tradition musical systems. I grew up playing a few instruments but didn't stick with them seriously. Now I'm basically just an avid listener of classical music but don't seriously play anything currently. But, I am interested in music history and theory.

I mostly lurk here and don't post too often but I think this IS fun, so... 1) Wittgenstein's Tractatus, part of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, several articles for a general ethical theory class (I've largely shied away from ethical theory but do have some interests in moral philosophy), and Kripke's Naming and Necessity 2) I'll just name a few from mind and language that immediately come to mind, though I doubtlessly have more: Kripke's Naming and Necessity, just about everything from Putnam's collected papers volume two, Burge's Foundations of Mind as well as Origins of Objectivity 3) I'm on the quarter calendar and haven't settled spring yet, however,this winter I'll be taking a class on Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, a class on Russell's On Denoting, and a philosophy of science class 4) No complaints at all. I love my department and wish I could be here longer. 5) Far from taking a break, I'll be using the time to read some things I've been meaning to get to but never had the chance to yet. I am quite interested in contemporary metaphysics but haven't been able to take any courses in it so I'll likely be reading in that area. 6) Math, music history, and ethnomusicology (especially gamelan)

I'm only interested in analytic philosophy. I'm just not interested by continental at all. Maybe since I stumbled upon philosophy as a math major first my interests are rather specific. I also went to a very analytic program for undergrad, but by choice (in fact I was originally at an analytic school and then transferred to an even more analytic one).

Well it's much to late to do anything about it now. Unfortunately for me, if what you say tends to be how many programs look at the quantitative score, I'm in trouble. My interests are highly analytic (philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, philosophy of math, Wittgenstein). Though I started college as a math major and have taken a substantial number of math courses (including upper division courses) with good grades in them. I'm hoping that this will help compensate for my low score.

I don't think it matters much as long as it's in before the deadline. That said, there are reasons not to wait until the last minute in case something unforeseen goes wrong.

I know most programs ask for 3 letters, however, is it acceptable to submit 4 assuming they are all very strong letters?

I've taken the GRE twice now and received a miserably low quantitative score both times. The first time I got a 151 and the second time a 153. My verbal performance was not as good as it could have been but acceptable: 163 the first time and 164 the second time. Now my scores barely improved on the retake so I don't think that another retake would help (not to mention I have even less time to study for a retake than I had last time). My main reason for retaking the test initially was that I was sick the first time I took it and thought that I'd do much better retaking the test when I was well--clearly this was not the case. Will my quantitative score ruin my chances at top programs? My philosophy GPA is perfect (4.0 with several A+s), I'm an undergraduate at a school with a department ranked just outside the top 10, and my writing sample is strong. In short, I feel very confident in all other aspects of the application. However, will my atrocious quantitative score prevent me from being considered at top departments? I'm worried that I'll be eliminated after the first cut due to my quantitative score.