jailbreak

I guess I don't understand why we should strive for a formula for graduate admissions. I get that a lot of people invest a lot of their lives into these applications and end up with nothing to show for it, and to some extent there's something morally repugnant about that fact. But on the other hand, there are good reasons why philosophy admissions aren't as formulaic as law admissions. Unlike many law schools, philosophy programs don't have hundreds of spots -- they often only have 5 or 6. I think it's obviously better this way, because if they accepted many more, very few of them would be able to get jobs after investing 5-7 years of their lives in grad school, and there wouldn't be enough funding for everyone. But if we're going to accept that it's best to keep matriculating numbers low, we will also have to accept that admissions will always have an element of luck and uncertainty; when admissions rates hover around 2 or 3%, it's just not possible that everyone will be able to get in where they want to go (and some may be shut out). And the numbers of accepted candidates at any one school are so small that it's hard to glean anything of statistical significance from the people who were chosen. Additionally, the writing sample is an important part of philosophy admissions (often it's the most important part), and evaluating writing sample quality is always going to be somewhat subjective. It's not something you can really account for in a formula or a survey. At the same time, I think the admissions process would be worsened if writing samples weren't a major element -- after all, composing philosophy articles is the cornerstone of what it means to be an academic in philosophy, and we are/were asking admission into that world.

I'd take it to mean 11:59 pm on April 15.

I've met someone who started out at one of the Paris universities and is pursuing a joint degree in philosophy with the University of Toronto, so I know it's possible. Maybe the Canadian connection makes it easier, because their universities don't cost as much as American ones? Alternatively, you can always have an external member on your dissertation committee if you transfer and want to keep Barbaras as one of your advisors. You can ask him now if he'd still be willing to work with you even if you were no longer at the same university, and go from there.

The people I met at Hopkins said they could easily afford a two-bedroom apartment without roommates on that stipend. They seemed to think it was more than enough to live on.

Yeah, I guess I interpreted the bolding and underlining of my "claim" as a little... lawyerly. I wasn't really claiming anything, just hypothesizing based on the limited advice I've received. Sorry if that wasn't clear. That said, continental philosophy shows up in some unlikely places, given that it's often unwelcome in traditional philosophy departments. So I guess I wasn't that taken aback by the suggestion that I could continue that sort of work in a divinity school, although again, I do think applicants should have *some* interest in religion. And while I'm sure many divinity schools are more traditional, it doesn't seem that strange to me that some divinity schools might interpret the study of religion rather broadly, just as English departments often encompass more approaches and objects of study than traditional analyses of anglophone literatures. It's possible that Chicago is the only one to take an untraditional approach, however. Anyway, sorry for derailing this post!

Again, I didn't apply because I have no academic interest in religion, so I guess I agree with you. But according to my advisor, who is in the Divinity School, it would have been a good choice for me. I don't know what else to tell you -- I'm simply passing along the information that was given to me and might be helpful to others. I have no desire to argue this point: I know nothing about other divinity schools, and I can't even tell you if they would have accepted me with my interests as they are. Saying "it's at least possible" is a pretty weak claim, but yes, it does reflect the advice I was given, and it's a jumping-off point for further research.

I didn't end up applying and never looked very deeply into the program and its requirements. But it's at least possible that it could be a good place for someone whose interests are philosophical, but not theological or religious -- especially if your interests are primarily philosophical, but also broad and interdisciplinary. It seemed to me that it would be a better fit for someone who at least had a secondary interest in religion, which is why I didn't apply. But it does have a number of faculty engaged primarily or secondarily in 20th-century European philosophy, including Ryan Coyne, Francoise Meltzer, Jean-Luc Marion, Arnold Davidson, Sarah Hammerschlag, and probably others. Only two of the ones I've listed are also in the philosophy department, but I know all of them have connections to philosophy students and/or faculty. This information probably isn't relevant to the OP, since they may not have interests in 20th-century European, but the point is just that there's at least one Divinity School where many faculty are not necessarily engaged in the historical tradition of theology in the way you were describing -- taking certain theological assumptions as a given -- and I'm under the impression that Chicago is not the only place where a lot of broad, interdisciplinary work gets done under the banner of "divinity." So this is all to say that it is at least possible to engage fully in philosophy in a religion department or divinity school, and may be the better choice for the OP.

I know that the Divinity School at UChicago offers academic PhDs, has a number of philosophers among its faculty, and includes faculty who are personally atheists and who study a wide range of religions beyond Christianity. I don't know if this would be a good choice for the OP, but I think there are a range of different divinity schools/religion programs, many of which could accommodate interests that are strictly philosophical (not even just in philosophical theology). I have no academic interest in religion, and my advisor recommended I apply to the Chicago Divinity School.

I actually don't agree with your writing sample advice. I wrote a sample on a topic completely divorced from my main interests, and I think it actually worked in my favor at most programs.

I PMed you.

You should get in touch with Raoul Moati at the University of Chicago. He just came last year from the Sorbonne, was a student of Jocelyn Benoist's, and would probably know a lot about good American schools for your interests, possibilities for doing a joint degree, etc. Plus I think he might be in France now if you want to meet in person. Good luck!

Yes, they are legitimate. The department is done contacting accepted and waitlisted students; whether they have an additional, internal reserve list of students they aren't planning on notifying, I don't know, but it seems unlikely.

Another option is to apply again in the first or second year of the PhD program. You can list the master's phase of your PhD (your coursework) as a credential when you apply again, you have more options for letter-writers, etc., and if you get shut out, you can still continue on in your home department. There's some advice on it in the comments here: http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2010/08/transferring-phd-programs-twice.html

Did you ask about reimbursement for international travel? I was able to get reimbursement for travel from Germany.

Just received notification of waitlist at Columbia. Really hoping some will turn that down!

I can help too -- I was most interested in top-ranked analytic programs where you can still do continental stuff. Similar AOI.

Well, I read the rest of the thread and Ian points out that CUNY has a history of taking several days to send out all the acceptances and waitlists (and rejections). I'm not sure why that would be the case if they're just being emailed out, but it seems consistent with no one posting -- with many of the other acceptances, I've witnessed a flurry of posts within a few minutes or hours of each other. So there's still hope as of yet.

That was me, to confirm. Email was sent at 1:32 PM EST, so I'm not sure what to make of the fact that other notifications aren't posted as of yet. Given that I didn't receive it until much later, I would have thought others would have beaten me to it.

Thanks! I'm pretty happy these days, haha. I'm excited too -- it will definitely be a hard choice.

The discussion has gone in an interesting direction, but I want to revive the original topic. Someone linked to these two ranking attempts: http://www.newappsblog.com/2014/07/job-placement-2011-2014-comparing-placement-rank-to-pgr-rank.html and https://phiplaces.wordpress.com/placements-2007-2014/. The data in these posts seems to conflict with each other -- perhaps because the second one looks at aggregate numbers of TT hires and not percentages, which privileges larger departments and cohorts over smaller ones. However, these two posts both seem to conflict with data I've seen elsewhere -- for instance http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2014/07/and-still-more-on-job-placement-2005-2010.html, and something else linked to on the boards recently (I think) about the same 5 schools accounting for ~48% of recent TT hires. There's some overlap, of course, in all of these, but it doesn't seem like someone can come to a conclusive response one way or the other as to which department is "best" at placement. Perhaps I haven't looked closely enough, but if I'm making obvious mistakes in trying to evaluate these, it would be best to have them pointed out. The "5 schools ~48%" statistic makes it seem really clear-cut, but then these other posts muddy the waters a little bit -- NYU is apparently one of the "top 5 schools," but according to the two other rankings, NYU is either 18th in placement, or only places 60% or more of its students, below almost 15 other schools.

Sorry to you and Billy Goehring -- I have no personal experience with the department, so your perspective on things is much more likely to be accurate than whatever I heard through the grapevine!

No, that was a response to Establishment, who posted right after you I believe.

Nope, just sorry for making the professor make an international call on his dime! (Also, it's "she"...)

For what it's worth, I've heard some bad things about dysfunctionality in the Oregon department. It may be better to research other schools in the NY area -- my impression is that there are a lot that could be good fits for you. (I know I'm commenting on this late, though -- sorry!)

Saying "not every AOS commands equal professional respect" is a far cry from saying "not every area of study is equal to each other." I would actually unambiguously agree with you on the former, and again firmly disagree on the latter.