philophilosopher

You still have your Warwick acceptance though, even if the rest is bad news (and that you meet the provisions for the conditional acceptance). So, you aren't completely shut out!

Even if Iamparem's comments are insensitive and offensive, I don't see how crude and curt responses are warranted. Comments like those only exacerbate the tension and trolling on these forums. In what way can they help? The issue is not whether lamparem's comments are misguided and excessive (which, to me, I agree with you that they seem to be); the issue is with how you respond to those comments, and, as far as I can tell, those responses seem to be discourteous and unhelpful (much like lamparem's) Addendum: this post should be prefaced with the observation that it seems highly unlikely one can assess someone else's capacity for philosophy based on gradcafe forum posts. If the entire reason for those comments toward lamparem's are only based on lamparem's comments on this website, then that just seems a little silly and presumptuous to me.

Yeah but the question is about philosophical maturity for an undergraduate, which is distinct from philosophical maturity as an academic philosopher with a PhD. Regarding his question, I am not really sure how to know if you are philosophically mature enough for graduate studies. You have to ask yourself if this is what you want and, if you decide it is, then submit the best crafted applications that you can. I think that is it unless I am missing something (which is always possible!). Alasdair MacIntyre gave an excellent criticism in a lecture he was giving about contemporary academic philosophy that is germane to our discussion. I don't remember it exactly, but one of his criticisms was that the current system of academic philosophy expects relatively novice students of philosophy to produce these massive dissertations, even though most students of philosophy at this stage really have nothing important to contribute to the history of philosophy yet. I think he is right in that genuine maturity in philosophy demands comfort with and understanding of the entire history of philosophy, and such maturity requires much more than a decade of study to develop and create something of interest and value to philosophy.

Interesting question. I am not really sure how to respond to it directly because I am not sure what the "extra element" is exactly. I can tell you that I do not think of myself as exceptionally philosophically mature. In fact, much of the reason I applied to graduate school is to gain that maturity. I am currently in a gap year between undergrad and (hopefully) graduate school next year. I chose to do the gap year so I could a) really polish my application and to see what life outside academia is like (which perhaps relates to your question on accumulating life experience). In this gap year, I have been constantly asking myself if I am happy where I currently am (working at a small nonprofit) or if I absolutely must return to grad school. As I am writing this, I stand with the latter option. So, perhaps it is a little presumptuous to assume you are philosophically mature (because that is part of what grad school is for) or perhaps it is something too difficult to self-assess because it is something very nuanced. Obviously, I'm aware you are qualifying the notion of philosophically mature as philosophically mature for an undergrad, which I think, ultimately, is something beyond your ability to self-assess completely. I would imagine that if you really thought about how you performed in class and the kinds of interactions you had with your profs and peers, you should be able to glean something revealing towards understanding if you are ready. Though if you are prepared, it will surely come through in the writing sample and letters of rec.

Just to be clear, Brian Leiter's blog is titled "Leiter Reports." His ranking of the graduate programs is titled "The Philosophical Gourmet Report." Also, he didn't just "opine" about which schools he thought was best and formulate a report on that; he conducted a survey from various academics in various departments. The methodology of the report can be found here: http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/reportdesc.asp The main reason that most people take issue with the PGR is because of the faculty chosen. It seems that the strongest criticism lies in examining who he chose and whether that choice was a fair and accurate sample size of academic philosophy.

Yeah, I know. It comes off more specific in my statement of purpose. I just find it difficult to decide post-undergrad (i.e. after only 4 years of undergrad philosophy courses) what exactly I want to study and pitch myself accordingly to the schools to which I am applying. To be honest, I want to study all of it (every nook and cranny!), but I fear saying something along those lines comes off as either too timid or too ignorant. I am still trying to find the right balance in describing both a genuine interest in and open-mindedness toward studying the history of philosophy and a clear outline of what my interests are currently without sounding too myopic or incoherent. Such are the frustrations of grad school apps, I guess.