Griswald

This post is probably of interest to most readers here. Any thoughts or comments?

Yes, but in a trivial way. I suppose any observable thing-in-the-world X "tells" us about the way the world is, viz. that the world contains X. The more interesting question is whether literature can tell us anything besides the fact that it's in the world. I think it can. But I also think that it doesn't do so often--most literature isn't that good. That's not grounds for total exclusion, but, in my opinion, it is grounds for preferring other ways of learning about the world.

What's wrong with swimming in Lake Michigan?

Congratulations!

Keep in mind that the PGR only measures the perceived quality of faculty work. Also, the current PGR is nearly 3 years old. I don't think you should distrust it, just recognize its limitations and be sure to get info from lots of other sources about programs you're interested in.

Glenn Gould.

I love Rachmaninov's pieces for piano. I've always preferred the second concerto, but they're all good.

I think it's much too early to do that.

Bach

In my experience, people who start off interested in philosophy of science tend to drift towards the philosophy of some specific science (physics, psych, cogsci, biology, etc.). Maybe that helps explain why not a lot of people list philosophy of science as an AOI.

I had in mind a situation where the adcom had a batch of applicants that were definitely rejected--no hope of making a wait list even if initial and secondary acceptances were turned down.

I'm interested in phil science. It wasn't an option when I voted, which is why I suggested that it be added.

Do people know of any departments that usually give out rejections before acceptances? It seems to me that acceptances usually go out first, or that they go out at around the same time. Is that right?

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

My status is the same as the one reported by zizeksucks, i.e. in the first stage of the evaluation process. I don't think it's that surprising that we have different statuses at this point. It will take some time for all the files to get forwarded to the department and to gave the statuses updated. Try not to freak out!

Most who apply are quite good. Prove it? Well here are two good pieces of evidence: expert testimony (from adcoms), my observations of my colleagues (they're all quite good).

Emphasis on "no matter how good you are [i.e. even if you're amongst the best], you might not get in."

Yeah neither can I, I was just wondering. Anyway, at this stage, I don't think it's very likely that you've been rejected at those places (modulo the fact that, for each of us at a given school, it's pretty likely that we'll get rejected!)

This might be too optimistic, but I wonder if inferring that you're on some kind of a wait list, until you get an official rejection, is equally justified.

It's mildly delusional to suppose that adcoms produce a strict ranking of candidates. "Best" just isn't a useful concept in this discussion. It seems that adcoms are able to identify many viable candidates--more than they can admit.

Sorry, I didn't mean to discourage you. You should definitely be pleased with getting into those conferences. Also, you should check with your advisor about what to do--how to word the email, who to send it to, etc. I was just giving you (and other readers) some information based on what my advisors have told me. Please don't let it be decisive.

Very good. Feel free to replace the numbers as you see fit. I had hoped that you'd just be able to see the analogy as I made it.

Lots of non-random systems produce outcomes that we can't predict with certainty (i.e. are "unknowable"). Your coin flip example is one such system. It's possible, in principle, to calculate whether a fair coin will land heads or tails. It's just messy because there are a lot of variables. Instead of doing the calculation, it's reasonable to be 50% confident in heads, given what we've observed about fair coin frequencies. Admissions are kind of like this. It's a pretty boring point, Loric.

If only we could afford to think twice...You raise an important point though. If it's just a undergrad or grad conference, it's probably not worth mentioning (though check with your advisor). Everyone I've ever asked about this says that only professional conferences count for anything, and even then, not much.

I don't think it's taboo to email someone in the department. Don't expect a reply though, and if you don't get one, don't keep emailing. Congrats on the conferences!