Die_Kurator
-
Posts
11 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Die_Kurator
-
-
-
I just got my "official-official" admission letter on Monday and sent in my official transcript. No idea when I sign anything else or what happens next. Will probably email someone within the department sometime next week after my transcript has made it.
-
A Mathematician's Apology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mathematician%27s_Apology).
This is a classic text, and most mathematician's revere it. It contains a lot of very interesting insights about math and while Hardy isn't a philosopher he is writing about philosophical issues. If he hasn't read it yet, it's worth reading for the insights into mathematics alone. I studied math at undergrad, and it's one of my favorite books.
A little background: Hardy was a huge pacifist and so only worked on topics in math that he thought couldn't ever be used to assist in war. His main focus was group theory, which he happily commented was the most useless branch of all math (ironically, it has HUGE military applications in cryptography. IIRC some of his own results in fact. Sorry Hardy). He wrote it when he was old, but his main purpose in the book is to defend doing math on purely aesthetic grounds. He rejects the idea that math is worthwhile for its practical results (medicine, improvements in quality of living etc.) because it also has a lot of practical defects (improvements of mechanization also mean improvements in war: better killing machines, nukes, etc.). I think he also points out that those sorts of things (good and bad) aren't really produced by mathematicians anyway, and that it takes some time for a theory to gain practical utility, meaning that a mathematician often doesn't have that kind of thing in mind anyway.
From there he spends some time trying to argue what makes a mathematical result beautiful. He goes through some interesting and easy to understand examples. It's not very technical philosophically, but there are a lot of important issues that he is talking about in the philosophy of mathematics. If nothing else, I'm sure it's a book he'd appreciate.
-
Wisconsin is boring. I have two friends doing grad school there (not in philosophy). Austin is a cool city. It sounds like Texas has got a lot going for it, that's all I'm saying. The heat in Texas probably isn't too bad. It's a dry(er) heat, so if you come from the East coast (you said you're from NYC), it's not bad. Austin is definitely more expensive, but that's because it's a better city. On the plus side you won't have to pay stupid amounts for heating in the winter.
On the philosophical stuff, everything you said sounds true. Keep in mind there's an overlap between phil. of language issues and meta-ethics, so even if you want to work on meta-ethics, someone who does language stuff could probably still help you a lot. Interesting views often come out of taking lessons from one sub-field and inserting them into another (imo) blahblahetc. Also if you are interested in empirical stuff (for language) UT has a really good linguistics department.
My .02. I didn't apply to UT, but was strongly considering it for a lot of the reasons I just said. I would do that if it were me in your shoes. I'm not sure if this is the advice you were looking for or not, but hope it helps you.
No offense to anyone from Wisconsin.
-
I thought Princeton didn't do wait lists. I thought I read somewhere that they just admit everyone they want to take and that's it. If more people accept than they thought, whatever they got the cash. Can't seem to find it on their site, but I don't see any waitlists in the database here for Princeton for the past few years. I could be wrong.
Sorry for being a downer...
EDIT: You should still contact them though if you haven't heard anything.
-
To your last point, I think it's probably a decent sign. As someone interested in mind, these are good places to do a research post-doc. I also think Jesse Prinz would make an exceptional dissertation advisor. He spoke at our graduate conference last year and he's - to quote Ben Affleck - wicked smaht.
I spoke to him a conference a year or so ago and he's also a wicked cool dude. Super nice, super approachable. Like Mattdest says, he's probably really nice to work with.
-
I thought, but I can't find it on the application proof, that there was a box to tick if you wanted to be considered for the MAPH thing, because I remember definitely not ticking it (since I would have turned it down). For the other people who haven't heard anything: do you remember this box existing? Did you tick it? Maybe that's why we haven't been contacted yet.
-
Has anyone ever asked for more funds to help finance a campus visit? I think I can afford it without more funding, but it's going to put a little bit of strain on me, and it will make any other visits I might need to do that much harder (assuming similar situation)...
-
what they see there future career plans being (some of the professors I would like to work with have been profs for a long time so I would like to know if they are thinking about going emeritus/retiring soon). Any other ideas or suggestions?
Can anyone advise how (/to whom) to ask this question tactfully.
-
If I didn't get outright accepted from the graduate program I currently attend as a graduate student, and I didn't get in to the bottom-ranked University of Connecticut, Storrs, then I'm not getting into Princeton, Michigan, or Columbia. And I told him it is really counterproductive for him to keep saying "oh well you never know keep some hope," because at some point I have to start being realistic about my chances, and keeping up hope in the face of completely overwhelming odds is only setting myself up for more and more disappointment.
Don't be so sure. I got notice from two places so far: Pittsburgh and Georgtown. Accepted to the former, rejected from the latter. In terms of how well I thought my interests aligned with faculty, FWIW, these two schools were actually at the top of my list. Sometimes the results just don't make sense.
Because the stronger ranked your program is, the easier your time on the job market. I've seen some professors who advocate a variant of the once standard advice that you just shouldn't go to graduate school in philosophy (unless you can't imagine yourself doing anything else). This variant is that, you shouldn't go to graduate school in philosophy at anything less than a top-20 program.
I've been told the latter, but not the former. I've actually been advised heavily against hte former. Don't go to graduate school unless you can imagine doing something else. My professors all advised me that I shouldn't go unless I could see myself doing something else after finishing my PhD, because a lot of people that get stuck in shitty positions (adjuncting forever, for example), end up there because they refuse to or can't see themselves doing anything else.
- Establishment and Monadology
-
2
Coming Back From A Shutout (Long-Term)
in Philosophy
Posted
I know someone who did that (though I'm not sure this person planned to do that), but they went to law school and then returned to pursue a philosophy PhD.
Presumably you'll pick up better recommendations while in law school? Study and try to do some legal research. Most philosophy programs care more about what you are capable of, rather than how much philosophy you've already read. Law and philosophy also overlap a lot, so try to find ways to stay active by looking into that (would be my advice). You should be able to write a really good writing sample given the experience you'll pick up before you apply again. That's my .02.