jjb919
-
Posts
176 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by jjb919
-
-
I'll be applying to 9 programs this fall. I was going to apply last year, but decided last minute to hold off because my wife got a promotion and we thought it best for her to spend 2 years minimum in the position before we theoretically move. So I've had an extra year to work on all my materials and have been done and ready to submit for a few months now. Just waiting for all the applications to become available, and then stagger the timing of sending out GRE scores, transcripts and submitting applications with the fees so that I can afford it. It's going to cost me over $1,000 to apply to all these schools (maybe more if some have increased their application fee since last year). Part of me is wondering if I should not bother and save the cash...
-
As to letters, I asked for mine late-October (well, for most of mine - one prof spontaneously offered during office hours to write one for me, which was a huge relief). September feels much too early, and November would make me worry about seeming disorganized - but these are all really just my gut-feelings. Others may have more rational justifications for asking at different points.
I've already asked for mine. I don't think it's too early to ask during the summer when professors (presumably) have a little more free time because they don't have to worry about teaching and grading (unless they're prepping for a new class) and don't have as much administrative work (unless they're the department chair). I got the sense that my advisers appreciated that I gave them such early notice so that they can get it out of the way now or budget their time for it later. I also provided a portfolio of information (more necessary for me since I've been out of school a couple of years) to refresh their memories on my grades, which classes I took with them and how I did, my accomplishments in grad school and after, the evolution of my writing sample from MA thesis to its current version, etc.
-
Also, why did they get rid of signatures? That's kind of annoying.
Oh, wow, yeah why did they do that? The signatures were a really helpful way of getting a snapshot of peoples' information and interests, and of keeping track of their outcomes. Now that they no longer exist, my statement about my signature is entirely unhelpful. So here goes:
I received my BA from a SLAC back in 2010, double majoring in philosophy and music. I applied to a small handful of programs in the fall of 2009, but my applications were hashed together quickly and I didn't take the time to thoughtfully consider which departments would be a good fit for me. Consequently I was shut out. I applied late in the spring of 2010 to NSSR (which has a rolling admissions process) and was accepted late summer. I got a deferral, as I was already working in Boston with a year lease and couldn't pick up and move on such short notice.
I did my MA at the New School, and incurred huge debt while doing so (not a smart move on my part; I thought/hoped I would be able to get more funding for my second year but was at the bottom of the pecking order and couldn't secure anything, then just racked up more debt). I started a full-time job at a non-profit in higher education while I was finishing up my thesis, and completed my degree in the fall 2013 term. I have since been working and wringing my hands over whether or not to continue toward my PhD. I have a wife, and we're looking to start a family in the near future. I know the realities of the job market, that by all accounts even if I complete my PhD I will not be one of the few to get a TT job (especially at any place that would pay decently enough to support my family and pay off my debt), as well as the opportunities for alt-ac and post-ac work. I know that, given my background and research interests, I am not a very enticing candidate to the elite schools that will help put me in the best position on the job market, All this is to say that even if I am accepted (a long shot), there is more of a chance that I will not go than that I will.
But I thought I would at least apply, see if I can get in to a school with good enough funding and enough opportunities for my wife to find a good job she enjoys. I would absolutely love to take the opportunity to make my contribution to philosophy (and, in a small way, to knowledge in general) and gain the level of expertise possible only through rigorous graduate training and writing a dissertation. To this end, I have put together the strongest application possible for me (I've had two years to do so!). I have strong recommendations, a decent CV with a few grad conference presentations and a publication. My writing sample is polished and something I am very proud of, I have done extensive research into the schools that are right for me with faculty I am excited to work with and my statements of purpose reflect this. I have the best chance of getting in now than I ever will.
My interests are in moral injury and recovery, moral dimensions of the body, embodied cognition, applied ethics, German Idealism, pragmatism, phenomenology, and existentialism. My writing sample is on the connection between bodily and dignitary harms. My undergrad GPA is a 3.90, and my grad GPA is a 3.97. I took the GREs in 2014 and my scores are 165V / 155Q / 5.0AW.
I'm applying to the following schools: University of Oregon; Georgetown; University of Colorado, Boulder; Fordham; Penn State; Stony Brook; Northwestern; University of Pittsburgh; and the University of Chicago's Committee on Social Thought (good luck, Cecinestpasunphilosophe!)
Best of luck, everyone! I hope TGC picks up as the season goes on.
-
It's been rather quiet on the philosophy forum this summer, and no one has started a 2016 applicant thread yet, so I thought I would. Pretty much all my relevant information is in my signature. I was going to apply for the Fall 2015 term, but decided to postpone a year so my wife could put some time into a promotion she got. As a result I have had a long time to work on my application materials and everything is pretty much ready to go; I'm just waiting on all the applications to become available so I can fill them out and send them.
Who out there is readying their applications for Fall 2016? Who out there was unsuccessful previously and a gearing up for another go? Tell us about yourselves, whatever you would like to share: What is your background and what are your interests; where are you thinking of applying; what areas of your application are you most nervous about; do you have any graduate work under your belt or are you applying straight from undergrad; have you targeted anyone you really want to work with; what are you using as a writing sample?
Let's get this going!
- overoverover and torpedofish
-
2
-
I'd like to add something to maxhgns' great response. After speaking with a number of faculty at several schools, there is another reason why a less prestigious school might have a better placement record than a more prestigious one. The top ranked schools, generally speaking, focus on the main core areas of philosophy (LEMMings: Language, Epistemology, Mind, and Metaphysics). But that is not necessarily what the majority of hiring schools are looking for. Keep in mind that the majority of open TT positions are at smaller state and teaching colleges, not big R1 universities. It's often the case that these schools are looking for philosophers who work in different areas, especially if those areas can cross over with other departments. The top ranked schools graduate a lot of PhDs with similar areas of expertise, and not a whole lot of open positions are necessarily in those areas. Graduates from a less prestigious schools with AOCs in non-core areas (applied ethics, feminist philosophy, philosophy of race, environmental ethics, critical theory, etc.) might be more attractive because they can interact with the student body in a number of different modalities, not just through the philosophy department.
I'm not claiming that this is the sole or even main reason, or that it is true without exception, but it's something to consider.
I think it is unlikely that anyone would be an equally good fit for two schools that are largely different in prestige, but considering for a moment that the two are equal I agree with maxhgns that you need to look at the culture of the department, how happy the grad students are, the level of funding, the level of departmental support for things like conferences, mentor/mentee relations, whether the location (e.g. urban vs rural) is one you can be happy in for 5-7 years, and so on. It is highly unlikely that any two schools are going to be equal on all counts, and it is very possible that a less prestigious school would 'win out' on more of these factors and hence be the better choice.
But don't worry too much about all this just yet; focus on your classes, focus on figuring out your areas of interest. Start looking at potential grad schools in earnest during your junior year, and start laying the groundwork for your applications that spring. Develop relationships with good letter writers, identify your strongest possible writing sample and work like hell on it, study earnestly for the GRE and then once you take it don't worry about it any more, do enough research into potential schools and persons of interest that you can write a natural and convincing personal statement. Think far enough ahead that you aren't overloaded with stress the fall of your senior year, but no need to think too far ahead. Best of luck with the rest of your studies.
-
I can't say 100%, but I am pretty sure a school will not consider you for a terminal MA program if you do already have an MA in philosophy. When you get an MA along the way to a PhD, it is because you've been admitted into the PhD program and simply met the requirements along the way.
-
I am going to echo what TheJabberwock said. Getting an MA first is, in most cases, a good idea rather than a bad one. It is a great stepping stone to getting into an elite PhD program if your credentials and/or pedigree are not elite coming out of your BA. Of course, the big caveat is it is a good idea only if it is funded. There have been a few threads on Leiter's blog where graduate admissions directors from a number of schools chimed in and noted how in recent year as many as half of their incoming PhD programs had MAs. Unless you are coming from a stellar BA program that prepared you really well for a top PhD program, getting the MA first can really help fill those gaps. It's not for everyone, but I think for most applicants it is a help.
-
kjgw06, if I may ask, how much scholarship is NSSR giving you? If what you say is true, and both schools are giving you near equal amounts of aid, then to be honest I would recommend you decline both and try again next year. While it is true that the admissions process is almost entirely unpredictable and you may get no offers next year, in retrospect I think no acceptances is better than going into deep debt for an MA in philosophy, which coming from either of those schools will by no means guarantee you a spot in an elite PhD program, and will not prepare you to do anything else. I know it's hard to hear, but I really wish I had taken an extra year to reevaluate and strengthen my application than jumping at NSSR's offer with 33% tuition assistance. If you really can't stomach the notion of declining both offers, then I would urge you to take the option that minimizes your financial risk, which is certainly Temple.
-
Hi there!
I'm looking for advice on a decision I have to make between the MA programs at Temple and the New School. There are other factors to consider, but I'm primarily looking for info on their reputations in comparison to one another.
Thanks
Hey kjgw06, I really don't know anything about Temple, but I am a graduate of the MA program at The New School. Are you getting a full ride? If not (and assuming you are getting a full tuition waiver from Temple), don't go to NSSR. I had to take out massive loans (even with a partial scholarship) to complete my studies, so much so that it might not be financially feasible for me to continue on to a PhD even with full funding. I will say that the teachers are excellent, and NSSR has a great reputation in Continental circles. However the student-teacher ratio is pretty poor and as a MA student you will not be first in line for the attention of the professors.You won't get a lot of close mentorship, and unless you're really lucky you won't get a chance to TA (no 1st year MA students are offered those positions and you will be applying against around 200 other students for roughly 16 spots for your second year). Also, keep in mind that because NSSR does a kind of philosophy that is very much not mainstream analytic philosophy, having a degree from there could work against you if you want to try to get into any Leiterific programs afterward. You will at least have to work a lot harder to show you can do their brand of philosophy. NSSR is a very exciting place, and the students are pretty congenial. But there are some huge downsides (i.e. funding, mentoring relationships, TA opportunities) that, in my opinion, outweigh the benefits. If Temple is giving you a tuition waiver, you're better off going there. I really can't speak to them as a department, though.
-
ooooh, I get it now.
Maybe I'm being optimistic or unnecessarily idealistic, but it seems like a lot of people here are genuinely happy for others who get in, and in some sense offer advice vicariously. There is a lot of genuine empathy and willingness to help from what I can see here. Maybe it's a chance to look at the situation of acceptances coolly without all the emotions involved in being accepted yourself, perhaps with the hope that others would do the same for you should your position change. Or maybe there's a fear that such attempts would be really transparent and bring with them a lot of scorn from others. There's also the uncertainty of your position on a waitlist, so even if you are successful in advising someone to turn down the offer of a school you want to get into, there is no guarantee that it will correlate with an offer to you.
-
I'm a little confused regarding the purpose of such advice. If you are willing to admit the market is so bad that those who are accepted should turn down the offer (presumably opening a spot for you), why would you then take the offer?
-
The only school that I have seen say that the PhD is shorter with an MA was Toronto, as you said above.
--
The reason I am asking all this is that I am likely going into a ranked terminal MA, and I am not intending to transfer prior to completing the degree. While I know that having an MA might improve my chances at getting into a funded PhD, I am trying to figure out whether I would be re-taking many of the same courses if I got accepted, or whether it would suggest that the PhD could more easily fund me because they aren't paying for 5 years, given that a year (or two) of coursework has been completed.
All of the schools I have named will allow you to transfer credits and shorten the time to degree. You can find the pertinent information on their websites: U. Oregon, Fordham, Georgetown, Boston College, Penn State (listed on page 30 of the Policies and Procedures PDF, under "Advanced Standing").
-
I'm just going to ditto what everyone else has been saying here. I can only say with confidence regarding the schools I have looked into applying to (which are mostly SPEP schools, I'm not sure if it's more common to accept transfer credits at SPEP rather than mainstream analytic schools), but the majority of them do accept transfer credits, enough to knock off about a year's worth of course requirements. Depending on how long you take on your dissertation, it may or may not shorten the time to degree. I know that U. Oregon, Fordham, Georgetown, U. Toronto, Boston College, and Penn State all accept transfer credits. Some (e.g. Fordham and Toronto) seem to have a different, shortened, track for those entering with a MA, while others just offer the opportunity to transfer a certain number of credits fulfilling a limited number of distribution requirements.
-
MA decision to be made! Wondering if you guys could help.
I've received three funded MA offers, and I've narrowed it down to two: Georgia State vs Houston.
Now while Georgia State is ranked higher by Leiter and has better placements overall, many of those placements are outside of my AOI (metaphysics/philosophy of mind), which means great placements like Stanford and Michigan don't really apply to me. Within my AOI, and accounting for the larger population at GSU, Houston and GSU actually place equally well in top-30 programs. Additionally, Houston has placed two people at Princeton in the last three years, and GSU hasn't placed anyone at Princeton in the last six or seven years. But GSU has placed at Yale, and Houston never has.
Second consideration: Houston has much better funding. 12k/year at Houston vs 5k first year and 10k second year at GSU. Plus, the GSU TA requirements are insane (in the second year, teaching a whopping 5 sections of critical thinking), whereas Houston's is more relaxed (regular 10hr/week grading etc.)
But..... GSU has a slightly better pedigree, which could make the difference in the end.
What do you guys think? For metaphysics/philosophy of mind, where would you go? Especially if you wanted to secure top-10 or top-20 placements?
Given the placement in your AOI (which is more important than overall placement and pedigree) is nearly equal, I would say the difference in funding makes a much bigger difference. Go with the offer that carries more money and more relaxed TA requirements. Go with Houston.
-
Practical reasons insofar as your willingness to teach at a community college (be it TT or adjunct), your ability to teach in other disciplines (if your work is interdisciplinary), or the financial feasibility for you not to work within academia at all after getting the degree. While the job market is horrid, I think there are certain factors that might make *an attempt* more feasible than others. I think the idealistic *and* the practical reasons for doing so need to be present.
Flexibility in terms of childcare can be a huge perk and in some regards having children can give you an edge academically. My time management skills are leaps and bounds better than my peers without children. When I sit down to work, that is precisely what I do. I also think my skills in assuring accessibility of concepts and material within my intro courses is a product of being a parent. That's not to say that one is unable to adopt certain pedagogical approaches if they are without children, but in my experience it can help.
Full disclosure: I have no debt from my undergrad and graduate degrees and neither does my partner, so our financial obligations are extremely unusual for a couple with multiple degrees. If I weren't pursuing a life in academia, I probably would be a stay-at-home parent so the risk of not having a job when all is said and done isn't a huge factor. I also would be a potential candidate for a job in a few other disciplines outside of philosophy. If things were different for me, I'm not sure I would be going into a program in the fall. I might have waited a few years once the kids got a little bit older. (One is in second grade and it is actually quite delightful talking with her about my work and philosophical ideas in general. Also reading philosophical texts (especially Hegel, Marx, and Derrida) to a toddler makes for a good time. In such moments, the fact that I often burn my candle from both sides seems to be insignificant and my tenacity becomes renewed).
Ah, I see better now. Yes, if I were to enroll, finish my degree, and go on the academic market, I am more than willing to take any sort of TT teaching job should I be offered one--be it CC, SLAC, state school satellite, or what have you (provided that the department itself doesn't seem like a nightmare). I am not willing to string together adjunct positions for years and years, or take multiple postdocs or VAPs that would require my family to move great distances every 1-3 years.
Thank you for your insight, you've given me a lot to think about.
-
Another aspect to consider is the amount of time you can devote to a PhD program if you are planning on having small children. I'm finishing up my second MA (one in political science, the other philosophy) and have had small children during both of my programs.
It is not for the faint of heart. Graduate students tend to get little sleep as it is. Imagine being woken up every two to three hours in the middle of the night for a year or more. Arranging (and paying) for childcare and having to miss classes and events when your child is too sick for daycare or a babysitter.
The sacrifice and commitment to combine a PhD in philosophy with child rearing, I think are for those who see more than just idealist value in the degree. You have to want it for both idealistic and practical reasons and plan on giving 100% to both the program and your family.
Unless - that is- you plan on saddling your wife with not only the financial responsibilities, but also the parental responsibilities.
Thanks for your perspective, buffyfanify. I don't plan on saddling my wife with financial and parental responsibilities. We both agree that one perk of being a grad student is the flexibility so I will be able to pick up child-rearing responsibilities. I am willing to miss classes and events when needed to take care of my child.
I am intrigued by your point that combining a philosophy PhD and child rearing are for those who see more than just idealist value in the degree. The general consensus (maybe it's unfair of me to speak so broadly) seems to be that practical considerations in getting a philosophy PhD are not tenable with the job market as it is; the PhD has little to no practical value. So it seems to me that if there is any justification in getting a PhD it is going to be more idealistic. This is not to say that I see absolutely no practical value in it--it is necessary for continuing on the academic track as well as the higher education non-profit or foundation track--but these practical reasons alone do not stand up. If you think that the idealistic and practical reasons together don't stand up, then I think that is a good reason for not pursuing it.
Sorry I'm out of upvotes for the day.
-
My thought is that it depends on how much you can be selfish. I don't think that your idealistic reason is convincing, but it doesn't matter if you really like to do philosophy and ready to sacrifice others for it.
Here is why I think your idealist reason is not convincing. You can be autonomous worker without PhD degree, as you mentioned. You can develop the expertise to contribute one's field and knowledge without PhD degree in philosophy. You can choose PhD in education, for example, where you can be a part-time graduate student.
But as I said, it doesn't matter whether or not the idealistic concern is convincing. But your practical concerns seem really tough. I am sorry that I can't say anything about that.
I agree with you on the skills part. The crux of my desire centers around being able to contribute to the philosophic discipline, which I don't think is possible without a PhD (maybe you do?). For at least this point I think the PhD is necessary. Then again, maybe this is a silly and unrealistic desire that is better off jettisoned.
If I were you, I'd wait until your new baby is a few years old.
Nothing splits a relationship apart faster than a seemingly-absent parent and a newborn child.
Grad school alone has a high divorce rate, so I hear.
Thanks, jujubea. My worries about waiting until are child is a few years old are several: the longer I stay out of grad school the more unlikely it is that I'll be able to put together a compelling application with decent recommendation letters; if our child is a toddler when I start grad school, s/he will be starting to attend school while I'm in grad school and we may have less control and choice of where we can or are able to afford sending him or her to school; by the time I graduate and am searching for a job, academic or not, we will most likely have to uproot ourselves at least one more time and the earlier this happens in our child's life the better I think.
Do you think I'm unfounded in my worries?
-
If I had massive debt like that and wanted kids, I would jump out now.
My backup industry/plan B is IT. That would knock out the debt pretty quickly if I ran full-on-ahead. I took some debt on for an MA, and it wasn't wise but we've already started paying it off and it is < 11k in principal. My wife and I want kids in a couple years; maybe 3 years. But if I had over 50k in debt* before the PhD, I could not see myself doing it.
If you pursued your plan B for a while, pay off your debt and such, could you reasonably get back in? Maybe the answer is No.
* I am pretty sure if I am figuring your interest correctly, your principal is far, far above 40k.
Thanks for the advice. In the interest of transparency, my principal is just shy of 75k for all loans, undergraduate and graduate. I don't have any experience (or perhaps even aptitude) or IT, and my plan B doesn't pay very well (although I have been working with a lot of data for my current job and with more experience and a few classes maybe I could land I job in data analysis that would pay well), so I can't reasonably knock out even a considerable amount of my debt quickly. My hope is that I could at least continue paying the interest while completing the PhD so that by the time I finish I will have the same amount of debt as opposed to more, but that may be too optimistic.
-
Hey everyone,
After frequenting this forum for about a year now; it's a really positive community filled with many intelligent and level-headed people, and I have come to value your insights and opinions. I was wondering if anyone wanted to give their two cents regarding my situation.
As some of you may know, I graduated with an MA in philosophy from The New School a couple of years ago. I am currently working at a non-profit in higher education (which I very much enjoy) and am preparing applications to PhD programs next fall. But I am wondering if I should abandon the pursuit before getting any deeper in, and the answer, I think, hinges on what value I find in the PhD.
I am not in this solely to get an academic job. Although a TT job is a pipe dream (and I would do everything I could to prepare myself to be competitive in the academic job market should I enroll in a PhD program), I know that even if I am admitted to a top program and 'tick all the right boxes' the sheer numbers say that I will not get such a position. I have several plan B's in mind if an academic job doesn't pan out.
(As a side note, I will mention that there is some instrumental value to getting a PhD in my case: if I wanted to continue down the higher-education non-profit path, I would need a PhD to get any position higher than the entry level position I currently occupy. Granted, this is a small niche, and getting a PhD for the sake of career advancement in my sector is certainly not worthwhile. But that is not the main reason I want to get a PhD.)
I want to get a PhD because I find it has intrinsic value, and great personal value for me. Having a PhD is valuable, in my opinion, for what it says about the knowledge, skills, drive, and potential for original contribution to the field of those who hold the degree. Someone with a PhD is an autonomous worker, internally motivated, capable of designing and executing large research projects, a good public speaker capable of explaining complicated ideas clearly. While a PhD isn't necessary for developing these useful skills, it is I think necessary for developing the expertise required for making an original contribution to one's field and, on a wider stage, knowledge itself. It's the grueling process of the PhD, and the dissertation specifically, that transforms a person into a scholar with his own intellectual identity and flavor, and who is capable of adding (in his own small way) to human knowledge. This is something I can't do with the amount of education I have now. It's not the mere credential but the process that is necessary. It's one thing to read philosophy in one's spare time, think about it, converse with others about it now and then. It's another to be in the thick of it, able to make sustained arguments for one's philosophical views. Even if I don't get an academic job, I will not have a real stake in my field (and the potential for contributing to it) without having gone through the rigorous intellectual process of the PhD.
However there are some sobering practical considerations that cannot be ignored:
1) In completing my MA I took on considerable student loan debt. I wasn't as informed as I am now. The amount of loans I had to take out to complete my MA means that even if I am fully funded for my PhD and don't have to borrow a penny more, the amount of interest I would accrue on my existing debt would amount to close to $30,000.
2) I am recently married and we are looking to have a child in the next 2-3 years. I want to be able to contribute financially to our big life purchases and savings, and this will be put on hold for quite a while if I enroll in a PhD program. My wife makes decent money but is not thrilled at the idea of supporting us (and a child) while I complete my PhD. She is a very practical person and although she fully supports the mission of a liberal arts education, she doesn't think that same justification holds water at the graduate level, with all the time and costs involved.
With these practical considerations in mind, I wonder if my admittedly idealistic reasons for wanting to get my PhD are no longer sufficiently compelling, or worse, vain and selfish. Do my reasons for wanting to get my PhD boil down to simple self-fulfillment and a deep-seeded but misplaced desire? Given my financial and family situation, do you think it is prohibitively unfair, foolhardy, and selfish on my part to pursue a PhD and put us through that?
Thank you for hearing me out. I very much appreciate any advice or thoughts anyone has for me. -
I'll be perfectly honest, and I hope this doesn't come off as overly harsh. I think it is a little disingenuous to enter a PhD with the intention of transferring out after a year or two. The program went through a lot of effort deciding between applicants and offered you admission because they think you'll do well in their program and they believe they have a lot to offer you in training you in your stated areas of interest. They are going to be putting a lot of resources into training you. It seems a little unfair to them to accept that with the intention of jumping ship to your dream school, and asking for recommendations along the way.
Of course there are some valid reasons for transferring out: your adviser leaves or is too difficult to work with, your research interests change and no longer match with the department's strengths, you are not or cannot thrive in the city you're in, etc. In these cases it is perfectly understandable to leave the program and I think your professors would do everything they can to help you do so. But I don't think that transferring out because you're not in your dream program falls into that acceptable category.
You don't know that everything will be perfect if you get into your dream school. It's very likely that the grass may not be so green once you get there. If you really feel that you have to get into that school, I think the most responsible and fair way of doing it is to turn down your offers and reapply next year, but that carries a huge risk as there is no way of knowing if you'll get in anywhere next year. But I think it's unfair to use one of the schools you were accepted to as a stepping stone, and I don't think you'll be able to rely on getting good reference letters. There is also the possibility that if you ask for them and tell your professors that you're trying to transfer out to the one that got away, solely for that reason, you risk burning some bridges and having them turn sour on you.
- perpetuavix, Monadology, surlefil and 6 others
-
9
-
Hey, just wondering what questions are or are not appropriate to ask an admissions office in light of rejection. Can I ask if my GPA was not high enough, if my recs weren't good enough, or if my paper was not up to par? Are all these kosher questions to ask?
I don't think it would be un-kosher to ask, but there's a very good chance they won't tell you. I don't think there's much to lose if you've already been rejected.
This has been my experience. Most departments will give you a vague, generic party line. I got this treatment from Fordham when I was rejected a few years ago. Boston College, on the other hand, suggested to me without coming out and saying it that I was rejected for low GRE scores.
-
I'm not sure I'd sign onto the claim that it's bullying, either. But he is the sole author of the most trafficked philosophy blog. And he allowed a nasty comment about an untenured, female faculty member on a thread about "issues in the profession". I don't think that's a good thing for the profession, and I don't think it's unreasonable for people to express their displeasure, especially when people see it as a part of a pattern.
That's fair enough.
-
I mean, the original author of the comment was clearly the one who is the most in the wrong. But why would a specific person's job trajectory be something fit for discussion in the context of "issues in the profession"?
I don't think it is appropriate, and it shouldn't have been cleared by Leiter. But I don't think that him allowing the comment and his admittedly obnoxious follow-up statement that she is a 'noxious presence' amounts to bullying, especially if the argument is that amounts to bullying because of his position, status, and recognizability as a member of the profession.
-
I'd be very interested to know what this comment was about:
University Of Oregon Philosophy, PhD (F15) Rejected via E-mail on 3 Mar 2015 A 3 Mar 2015
- One of the profs closest to my AOI signed an open petition to protest another prof approving a comment on his own moderated blog. I wish I was kidding. Would have declined anyway.
Is it about this? http://www.newappsblog.com/2015/02/brian-leiter-behaving-badly-part-the-umpteenth.html#more
Man, I think this Leiter-hating bandwagon is going a bit far now. I'm not his biggest fan, and I admit being swept up by the whole September Statement, but now it seems like his detractors are grasping at straws to make it seem like anything he does is an example of bullying.
Apply this semester, or take a year off?
in Philosophy
Posted
Take a year off. Don't travel, don't stay at home. Get a job, and preferable one that has nothing to do with philosophy. Try to get a job in a field that you are interested in, and see if you like the work. Use the year to strengthen your application materials as much as possible, but use it also to test the waters in other areas and gain valuable experience. You may just like the work enough to not want to go back to grad school, or if you do decide to go to grad school and find yourself unable to snag an academic position afterward, it will be helpful to have some non-academic professional experience on your resume.
As far as I know, schools do not look down upon taking a year off before going into grad school. In fact, on a Leiter thread a while ago (I can't find it at the moment), many DGSs said those who took a gap year before entering grad school were more mature, had a better sense of what they wanted, were more motivated and usually ended up being better students. All in all, taking a gap year certainly does not hurt you, and may even help you, in several ways.