Wait For It...

Out of up-votes, but you're welcome!

Out of up-votes, but thanks for the recommendation!

TheVineyard: Two things. 1. It seems to me that, if there are negative posts to be found on these forums, they are yours. (Hence, the copious amount of down-votes you sometimes receive.) I've thus far avoided you---and will hopefully continue to do so after this post---but your comment about my list has motivated me to say at least something by way of reply. I take it that most, if not all, of us here are in the stressful process of awaiting responses that could change what we do and where we are for the next five years. I also take it that most of us come to these forums because they contain some connection, community, and advice. This particular thread contains posts by people (like me) who are offering advice on how to prepare oneself for further graduate study. I provided list (which I'll address in a moment) to contribute to the discussion, and I don't understand why you would bash it. Are you playing around? Do you enjoy trying to upset others? Do you have little time on your hands for much else? Are you trying to elicit some sort of vitriolic, polemical response? I really don't get it. 2. If you don't like the list I gave, there are about a million or so appropriate ways to object to it other than the way you did. For one, the list should be judged by the quality of the works within it, not by whether some of its works were authored by "religious" or Notre Dame philosophers. Plantinga, Loux, and van Inwagen aren't on the list because the maker of the list was biased in favor of religious, Notre Dame philosophers. They're on the list because they ought to be. Plantinga's Nature of Necessity was, along with David Lewis' Plurality of Worlds, one of the earliest complete theories of modal metaphysics to appear in the philosophical literature in 20th century. If you don't think Loux's introduction to metaphysics is a good place to start, then I have little else to say to you about it. Lastly, van Inwagen's Material Beings helped shape the current debate on composition. He was basically the first (or at least most recent) person to frame and address the so-called "composition question." All three of those works are important to gaining a good groundwork for further study analytic philosophy (metaphysics in particular); that's why they're on the list. It simply doesn't follow that, say, van Inwagen's metaphysics are religious because he himself is "religious." If you have any substantial reasons to think those authors should've been left off the list, let them be known. Otherwise, your post to seems irrelevantly negative. Finally, you'll notice that the list contains mostly non-religious philosophers (like Lewis and Sider). What follows solely from that? Nothing. Those works are on the list because they ought to be. If you want to offer your own list, please do; that's what this thread is for. But please, for the sake of us all, stop the negativity. Thanks.

For those aiming to study something in the analytic tradition, the following list was given me by a well published, tenured professor of mine (PhD from Notre Dame). The list is geared toward forming the groundwork for further study in analytic philosophy. I plan to begin reading through it, continuing until I start next Fall; I've read several of them already and will probably read them again! Hope this helps. Metaphysics: Start here: Loux, Metaphysics (Routledge) Then master these: van Inwagen, Material Beings Plantinga, Nature of Necessity Lewis, On the Plurality of Worlds Kripke, Naming and Necessity Stalnaker, Inquiry Sider, Four-Dimensionalism Epistemology: Start here: Feldman, Epistemology (Prentice Hall) Then master: BonJour, The Structure of Empirical Knowledge Plantinga, Warrant and Proper Function Conee & Feldman, Evidentialism: Essays in Epistemology Alston, Epistemic Justification. Essays in the Theory of Knowledge. Dretske: Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Fumerton: Metaepistemology and Skepticism. Williamson: Knowledge and its Limits Ethics: Start here: Timmons, Moral Theory; Shafer-Landau's Moral Realism: A Defence. Then master: Rawls, Theory of Justice (just the first 100 or so pages) Smith, The Moral Problem Macintyre, After Virtue Parfit, Reasons and Persons Mackie, Ethics, chapter one, Moore, Principia Ethica, chapter one Ayer, Language, Truth, and Logic, chapter on emotivism

Is it just me, or would others of you also rather a school send out rejections first? If they do, then you know pretty quick whether to be hopeful. If you're rejected, then you can move on and stop expecting; if you're not rejected, you can have legitimate hope to be either wait listed or accepted. But if a school sends out acceptances and wait lists first, then you, although you are pretty sure you are rejected, you always have the lingering hope to be wait listed; you are pretty sure you're rejected, but not certain, which means you can't stop thinking about it!

No word yet from UCR to me. I guess that means I'm out, even though the website still says my application is "being processed." Has anyone else removed themselves from the wait-list? MattDest: does your account still say "being processed?" Congratulations on Arizona, by the way! I bet it feels nice to know where you're going already!

A friend of mine showed me the Cornell rejection letter he received today from Ted Sider. Now, part of me wishes I'd applied to Cornell. The application fee notwithstanding, it's essentially a win-win: you're either admitted, which is obviously more preferable. But if you're rejected, you receive perhaps the nicest email of any from a school this application season---included those that accept you! What a nice email from a nice guy. I wish all schools were as considerate and cordial.

I'm not doubting that some people do post fake notices; it seems like they do appear (and have been recently). But what's the motivation for it? I don't get it.

ianfaircloud: I've only recently seen your blog, and the information contained within it is so very helpful. Thank you for the time and effort you've invested.

I asked one school whether they could provide more funds and was kindly told that the original offer was all that was available. My request didn't seem to be a problem at all; it just depends on how you ask. Hope that helps.

Thanks!! But no, only I applied. But she needs to like where we end up, so her opinion greatly matters! We'll have a fun trip.

My wife and I will be visiting Missouri March 13-16.

Rejected from UC-Irvine. This is a bummer, but I knew going in that admission would be difficult. However, I know two current students who were originally rejected (in their respective application years) before being offered later in April. So there's a small glimmer of up, though I think I'll just assume it won't happen. Congrats to those accepted at Irvine, and good luck to those on the wait list.

Ok, thanks for the helpful info! Best of luck to you as well!

Congratulations on the Iowa acceptance! Have you received formal notification yet? My status still says 'In Progress,' and the office assistant told me she thought notifications would be sent out next week. I'm not sure whether I ought to be worried. And, thanks to your notice, I've been checking my Iowa account every 30 minutes or so!

I found the two Irvine wait-list notifications this morning. Anyone want to claim them? Were they sent yesterday? I didn't receive one and am assuming a rejection at this point.

Hang in there. You have six other schools left to hear from.

Thanks!

I'm confident someone has asked already, but how does one add the admitted/rejected/GRE (and so on) content to the bottom of a post?

Rasmussen recently accepted a tenure-track job at Azusa Pacific, which isn't too bad at all. And although he's well published in philosophy of religion, he wrote his dissertation on a theory of propositions.