I believe this question has the capacity for being, both, quite simple and quite complex. My question is: to all others applying or those already admitted, how did you choose to go continental or analytic (or for those still applying, did you decided to apply to both)? I'm curious because, if I'm completely honest, my choosing to go continental was, more or less, random.
Upon honest self-reflection, here is how it happened that I went continental: my university's department is mostly continental and it just so happened that the two analytic professors we have are so busy with their administrative duties that the classes I took with them suffered as a result. In other words, the classes I took that align with continental camp happened to be more interesting (both because of the subject matter and because of professors who have the time and to make these classes wonderful). So, yes, I love studying the philosophies/philosophers who are typically classified as continental, however, I do feel as though I wasn't really exposed to much analytic philosophy in my undergraduate training. I have tried exploring analytic philosophy on my own, and I think I've chosen well by applying continental. However, I do wonder if I would think differently after learning under someone who is an expert in the field.
Does anyone else feel they were formally educated only one way or another? Does anyone feel as though they had equal exposure to both? If so, how did you choose? If you say "the philosophers who fall under X camp have inspired me," please be specific.
Lastly, there is the add complication that a few articles I have read seem to imply a near ending of this divide in American departments (which, if true, I would be in favor of).
All comments welcome, and feel free to comment on any issue I've raised or anything on the matter of continental/analytic philosophy
