Kantianisms

Yeah, I think it would be weird if an institution got your highest scores unofficially and then received scores from a particular date that didn't have all your highest scores.

It depends on what you mean by tailoring. Have you sufficiently shown why you would be a good fit for that program? Perhaps the explanation of your interests is sufficient for every program you're applying to. If not, you should do some extra tailoring.

What I really want to know is why the president is applying to philosophy programs... Seriously though, those scores are awesome and the fact that your worried about them makes me more worried about mine. I think you'll be fine.

Georgia State also seems to be strong in political philosophy.

Arizona is one of the schools I am considering. Somebody mentioned that placement is poor. Could that be elaborated on? Is that a symptom of the program? If so, what may be the cause? Is it that Arizona is such an awesome state that nobody wants to leave and are willing to take lower prestige jobs? Or does the program truly not prepare students well for the job market? Is it similar for most advisors, or do some advisors have better placement records?

How is UConn for ethics and political philosophy? Also, could you elaborate on the downsides of Storrs?

Just took the GRE. I received a 166 verbal and 153 quant. I'm still waiting on the writing portion, but I don't feel that I did much better than my previous 4.0; 5.0 at best. Assuming that the rest of my application would be good enough to get me into the final round of cuts but not good enough to clearly be the best, do you think that it's worth applying to top programs with such a score?

That would be extremely helpful, especially since that type of information is so hard to find and/or to know who to ask or how to ask them. Not to mention that contacting multiple people from multiple schools would be quite time consuming.

Google is your friend Paul Canetti, founder and CEO of MAZ Media Amol Sarva(Peek), Ken Reisman (TLists), Damon Horowitz (Aardvark), Patrick Byrne(Overstock), Josh Snyder (Treeline Labs), and of course Chris Dixon (Hunch) http://www.businessinsider.com/successful-philosophy-majors-2014-1?op=1 Larry Sanger - co-founder of Wikipedia http://healthcareethicscanada.blogspot.com/2008/12/philosophy-degrees-and-famous-people.html That's just to list a few. Now, if you mean individuals who were PhD students and entrepreneurs at the same time, well, I have no idea. However, I suspect that this would be an extremely bad idea as both take up an inordinate amount of time, and that doesn't even ensure that you're going to be successful in either. So, it would seem to be a surefire way to fail at both if you tried to do both at the same time.

That is extremely helpful. Thank you so much! However, I wonder whether or not it is worth it to add debt for Tufts or Brandeis considering the placements of other top MA programs. Ian Faircloud has a nice chart (which hopefully will be updated soon) http://faircloudblog.wordpress.com/masters-program-placement-record/ UWM definitely did better than Tufts this year, and Georgia State was comparable to both UWM and Brandeis. NIU didn't seem to have a great year, but they did get students into both Toronto and USC, and generally do comparably. I wonder what others think, but it seems to be a better idea to go with MA programs other than Brandeis or Tufts since you are just as likely to be placed in a good program without adding additional debt. What do others think?

I was just wondering what you all thought about taking risks with the writing sample. Of course, there are many different types of risks you could take, but I am specifically wondering about organizational risks. That is, making the paper extremely structured vs. intertwining parts of the paper. For instance, you could start with the intro, then give the exposition of the view you are challenging, move on to your 1st criticism, then field some objections, then move on to the 2nd, field some objections to the 2nd, and then conclude: Intro Opposing View Criticism 1 Objection Reply Criticism 2 Objection Reply Conclusion Or, you could perhaps intertwine the criticisms with the "opposing view." That is, rather than having clear-cut sections in which you finish the entire exposition and then move on to your 1st criticism, you could raise your criticism at the point in the "opposing view" that you take issue with. Then, you could field some objections, strengthen their argument, give a reply, and then perhaps grant them the point for the sake of argument and continue with the exposition until you come to the 2nd criticism. There are, of course, other ways one could intertwine parts of the paper, but this is the most straightforward example I could think of. The dilemma I see here is that, on the one hand, the very structured way of doing things is extremely clear, straightforward, easy to follow. However, I think that in some sense it is "easy," in that it is simple and expected. I also think that it can be somewhat boring to read a paper like this - it's almost mechanical. On the other hand then, I think that having this riskier structure is more interesting to read - it's almost like reading a philosophical story. However, I think it is much harder to pull off, and if you don't do it right, it becomes unclear and difficult to follow. So, I'm wondering what people think. Is it better to attempt a riskier type of paper? The pros may be that pulling off this type of paper looks much better to an admissions committee, and, even if it isn't consciously recognized as "better," it still may be a more pleasant read (which is a plus with so many applications). However, you may spend a lot of unnecessary time attempting to fiddle with the organization of the paper when you need to be working on other parts such as argumentation, clarity, fielding more objections, etc., and you may ultimately fail.

I was just wondering what information people have regarding funding for top (PGR rated) terminal MAs. In particular, I was wondering about Tufts and Brandeis, both of which don't seem to offer much information. Brandeis: Tuition Remission and Scholarships Financial aid from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is available. Most students qualify for some financial aid. In addition, the department offers several teaching assistantships to incoming candidates, thus helping defray the cost of graduate study in philosophy. http://www.brandeis.edu/departments/philosophy/mastersprogram/whybrandeis.html Tufts: We provide partial tuition remissions to most of our successful applicants who demonstrate financial need. The average tuition remission is about 60% of the total tuition cost....After their first semester in the program, students in good academic standing can apply for a Teaching Assistantship. These are granted on a course-by-course basis and currently pay slightly more than $4,200 per course (or, when a course breaks into discussion sections, per section, though students rarely are assigned more than one section per semester). Though we ordinarily can accommodate all M.A. candidates in good standing, when there is a shortage of Teaching Assistant positions, priority is given to students with less teaching experience--all other things being equal. Except under unusual circumstances, we do not assign teaching to first-semester M.A. candidates. http://ase.tufts.edu/philosophy/graduate/financial.asp This is opposed to a program like UWM: Teaching Assistantships A number of graduate teaching assistantships are available, offering full tuition remission and salaries of $7,659 for first year TA's and $7,745 for second year TA's. Normally, provided they make adequate progress toward the degree, students who enter with graduate teaching assistantships will have them for the full two years. All applicants are automatically considered for teaching assistantships. No special application form is needed. http://www4.uwm.edu/letsci/philosophy/graduate/ So, I am wondering if anyone has an idea of how much a graduate student has to pay for school (if at all) for Brandeis or Tufts, or any other MA program. Also, if you have information on a program like UWM, it would be nice to know how well the stipend covers living expenses, whether you need another job (besides TAship), etc. Thanks!

You must mean a MA at BGSU? They do have placement records for PhD http://www.bgsu.edu/arts-and-sciences/philosophy/graduate-program/phd-dissertations-and-placements.html Although, I don't think that they have a terminal MA, but they have tried to keep track of those who leave after finishing their MA http://www.bgsu.edu/arts-and-sciences/philosophy/graduate-program/masters-program-graduates.html Hope that helps!

Undergrad: I went to a small, non-prestigious, Catholic, liberal arts college. It's known in the region for being a good school, but nobody outside of the region has heard of it. I changed my major from history to political science with a minor in philosophy in my junior year, and realized my senior year that I wanted to do philosophy. Of course, I foolishly decided to apply that same semester and go absolutely nowhere - I had only taken 3 philosophy courses (2 more in progresses), had no writing sample, hadn't studied for the GRE, done very little research, and had no relationship with my professors. I had an average GPA with a 3.55, a 3.75 in Philosophy, and a 3.65 in Political Science. I also studied abroad in Ireland for a semester. After failing to gain admission to graduate school, and receiving my BA in Political Science, I decided that I would get a second BA in Philosophy at a larger state school, work on my philosophy, get to know professors, and work on a writing sample. This is what I am currently doing. Other: I took the GRE late November of the same year that I applied and did about average (compared to the general population) but did slightly above average for verbal. I tutor in both writing and philosophy and am the president of philosophy club. Writing Sample: I'm not sure what I want to use yet, but I may use my paper on Korsgaard's constitutivism, defending it against objections to the possibility of accounting for bad action. Interests: I have many interests. My main interests are in value theory/normativity - social and political philosophy, ethics, metaethics, philosophy of action. I have some other interests in metaphysics and epistemology, philosophy of law, feminist philosophy, philosophy of social science, philosophy of mind, and game theory. As for the history of philosophy, I'm particularly interested in Kant, modern philosophy, continental, analytical, and I'm also really interested in the historical progression of philosophical thought (rather then particular historical views).

Thanks everyone! Your advice is much appreciated

Now that admissions season is essentially over, and most have committed to a program, would any of you like to comment on your undergrad institution? It would be immensly helpful to those who will be applying next time around.

Sure, but most have already asked these questions and visited campuses quite recently. It's alright though, I won't push it any further. If anyone feels differently, please feel free to post your advice here or PM me if you would prefer to keep things anonymous.

Let's hope so. Not sure why offering information in a private message is so different than being asked in an email.

It certainly is a broad request, but I guess I figured that people would be willing to help out. It's not going to be much different from emailing graduate students in a particular program, since I'm not going to know who your advisor is before hand. That is, if I pick a random graduate student to ask about a particular faculty member or AOI within the program, I'm not going to know if that graduate student shares my AOI or is an advisee of a facutly member I would like to work with. Furthermore, despite Establishment's worry, emailing graduate students at a specific program would be just as anonymous, and they would still have no idea whether or not I'm going to be accepted into the program. Moreover, the request is broad is one sense, in that I was wondering if people have general information (e.g. Brian Leiter seems like he feels self-important or Daniel Dennett doesn't teach many courses). Otherwise, it is only broad in my question format, but very specific to a reader and potential commenter. For example, I saw a post which stated that a student visited both WUSTL and Duke and said that both seemed like great programs - advice like this would be much appreciated. Or, it would be very specific to the school you are attending or have currently attended. I understand that this may make people uncomfortable, but I thought I would try, since it would be easier than emailing a number of graduate students from 20 or so schools. Moreover, if anybody had advice on departments or faculty which could be made publicly available, it would help out future applicants on their decision of where to apply.

Thanks for the advice, but I have checked out quite a bit of information such as PGR, Leiter Reports blog, Philosophy News, Eric Schwitzgebel's blog, etc. However, I think that everyone knows there is much more specific information which should be a factor in decision making - for example, a top-ranked faculty member who you would like to work with may not be particularly helpful as an advisor, or a top-ranked faculty may not have a program which prepares students well for a career in academia. These of course, are going to be things you won't find from looking at rankings and would be difficult to infer from department websites. Now, it seems like most people wait until they've gotten acceptance letters and visit departments before they take this information into consideration, but I would prefer to take this information into account in the schools I decide to apply to, if at all possible. Now as for not being many members and lots of graduate programs - that's certainly true, but I was wondering if anyone had any information about any department, faculty, or program. My particular AOI is in normative subjects, so if you have any information regarding faculty or departments that specialize in political philosophy, ethics, metaethics, philosophy of action, etc., that would be the most helpful. Again, thanks for the advice - I really do appreciate it. And thank you in advance to anyone who would be willing to help a prospective student out.

Hi all, I was wondering if either current graduate students or those who have recently visited departments had any advice about particular programs or faculty. How helpful are professors? Is the department a good climate for study? Is funding sufficient to support living in the area? How is the TA/RA load? Do they prepare you well for the profession/placement (PhD for MA programs & job for PhD programs)? Are there any particular issues within the department (such as between faculty members)? Are there any particularly "bad" (unhelpful, rude, etc.) faculty? Is the area "good" (I am married, so I don't necessarily mean entertainment wise, but rather standard/cost of living, security, etc.)? I am planning on applying to both PhD and MA programs in the fall, and am trying to narrow down my list of schools to apply to. My areas of interest are most normative domains - political philosophy, ethics, philosophy of action, metathics - so if your AOI is similar, your view would be quite helpful. I know that most people would prefer remain anonymous, particularly if you happen to be commenting on particular faculty members you would suggest steering away from, so if private messages work better for you, that is perfectly fine. Any and all advice is greatly appreciated!