Nastasya_Filippovna

Yes! I love watching this process unfold!

So true! It's hard for me to do this because I get so hyper-focused on my work and I feel guilty leaving it, but I feel it's imperative, especially with longer and more significant pieces of work. You just start to glaze over the piece and inevitably lose the critical eye if you are reviewing it ad infinium without intervals away. I realized that I was reading it with all the written arguments unquestioned, unconsciously making assumptions that the arguments were already well articulated- the opposite of my intentions! I'd come back to it in a few weeks and be able to tear into it, my first thoughts being, "HOW did I miss that!" I sent the same sample to all schools- my sample is on Nietzsche and some of the schools are definitely more analytic-oriented. I have interests in both analytic and continental, so I figure they will do with it what they will, but this piece was my baby and by far my best work. I simply explained that in my SOP.

Speaking of analytic-oriented programs, have you (or anybody for that matter) heard much about the PhD program at Wayne State? Theirs is analytic and yet you don't see it listed on any of rankings sites. I was wondering if you knew why that was? Is it because the professors don't publish much?

hahahahahahahaha!! YES!!!! He knows when I've been misinterpreting text, he knows when I've not made a valid argument....etc

I'm thinking Feb too for the Dec/early January ones- although from what I recall a lot of people seemed to be posting results from some schools last year in March- ugghhhhh do I REALLY need to wait that long?

This is embarrassing- what is TGC?? It has been really nice reading all the philosophy books I never got the time to peruse during my time in school! I've been on a phil of mind kick lately, just finished LeDoux's The Synaptic Self which I really enjoyed, and of course indulging in some more Davidson. I'm about to read Clark's Supersizing the Mind and some William James, and then it's back to some Hegel!

ahh Kuhn! Kunn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions was one of my definite "Yes!!" moments in philosophy And the quine I've read is brilliant, although limited- one of my goals in the next few months is to read more after I'm done with my current pile on the reading list. Even when you don't necessarily agree with the thesis, you cannot deny the brilliance of his thought and execution of his arguments.

Great list! You know Hegel is one of my top too- in my last semester I took a course on German Idealism and I became enamored with Hegel. It's painful because I feel to truly appreciate him, I'd have to spend a lifetime studying Hegel (and within the context of German Idealism alone), but I truly hope to study him enough to at least have strong working/academic knowledge of him because I perhaps see in him what many people see in Marx, a true social ideal (yet with the added appeal of an ingenious ontology ). Kant, while I admire him and of course concede his brilliance, never moved me. Hegel was inspiring!

Somewhat related, who have been some of the most influential philosophers you have all studied? As far as continental I would say Nietzsche (I am, however, only interested in German Idealism - 19th century continental) and as far as analytic, Donald Davidson. Perhaps it was because the undergrad institution I went to had a lot of continental enthusiasts, but I was always amazed at the lack of awe and reverence Davidson inspired in my fellow students! I think he is simply profound.

Perhaps their ranking results from the fact that they are an ivy league? I know they also have Jaegwon Kim, and although I don't agree with reductive physicalism, he is an incredible writer and has been a profoundly influential philosopher and a highly respected name in philosophy of mind for decades. It's a shame that the placement record has been so unsuccessful - ironically you would think graduates would be having luck for what I'm speculating is the same reason the school has the ranking it does- status alone. I liked what the "nature" of the program suggested it provided. If I could recall correctly there was a prof there who was well versed in Nietzsche and German Idealism, and the rest devoted to analytic and phil of mind- that's an ideal program for me. 'Tis a shame.

sometimes I think- dear lord- this is the intelligentsia version of American Idol!

That sounds like a truly fascinating paper!

That's a genuinely horrible situation you are in- my god, does that happen often?!

I am curious what country in South America are you from Reixis? I am in the US so I'm sorry I am not an international student, but I can imagine it must be frustrating not having that experience to share with anybody else around you! Are there many people from other disciplines at your graduating school that are pursuing further degrees? I know that from my tiny university there aren't too many other phil students who did or plan to pursue post-grad phil work (one or two actually in the next graduating class), but it has to be an entirely enervating ordeal to apply from another country, and hard to do it alone! Your professors must be impressed!

I don't fill that out either. I don't fill out the question regarding what profs I would like to work with either- I figure somebody's ego may get bruised if I don't include their name and they work on the same topics I wish to pursue and that could possibly count against me. I just want to play those questions as neutral as possible by avoiding them!

And your firstborn, don't forget that

thank you, that's really encouraging news! I come from a small, unknown college, but I thankfully have a super strong rapport with all three of my letter writers. It's good to know that should help!

So just how important IS it for your letter writers to be illustrious names in the field of philosophy? I've heard both responses- yes, it heavily influences adcoms, and no, only the content of what they write counts. I have to guess that each committee is a tad different and the truth most often lies somewhere in the middle (unless, of course, you've worked side-by-side with Kripke and Dennett as who they describe as their protege). Is it truly, however, a strike against you to have unknown profs if they are writing outstanding letters? Just wanted to get some thoughts.

I was just curious- your writing sample- is it from one of your philosophy courses or on a philosophical topic? Perhaps this was implied, but I just wanted to know for sure.

that's so funny, existentialism is what got me into philosophy too, and the same thing happened to me too- once i began studying it, I lost complete interest in it outside of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche (both of whom fall outside the trend 20th era group anyway).

What you said actually brings up a pet peeve of mine- professors who teach a philosophy class in an area in which they aren't trained or in which they aren't remotely familiar. You brought of Plato and I had an awful Ancient Class. It was my first semester as a phil major and the prof I had never specialized in ancient- we read two short plays by Sophocles, did the Presocratics, read the Republic and Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics. We should have covered a lot more plato and more aristotle. The profs who have studied ancient did so much more in their classes and I rue the fact I never got to take the class with them. Now I don't have any desire to specialize in ancient, but I do plan to read more Plato because he's just so fundamental. I just find it atrocious that it wasn't included as a part of an ancient philosophy course. I notice this so often- a prof who gets assigned to a teach a class and really doesn't know how to teach it. Thankfully this only happened to me in ancient.

So true, I mean I have read excerpts from many of the classics but Lord knows I haven't read them front to back. (and the time I've spent reading Descartes is time I'll never get back- haha! No, he is incredibly important I just find his style excruciatingtly unbearable! Kant and Hegel, they are of course challenging reads but so rewarding in my opinion, although I've only scratched the surface. Right now I've just been on a big analytic push, and once I'm done I want to get back to more German Idealism, I miss it!

Perhaps this suggestion seems outlandish, and I accept that, and it's certainly not premised on any formal philosophical theories or training, but I think Lars Von Trier's Antichrist is incredibly philosophically provocative. Now it of course it very graphic, but von trier's sex and violence is not the tarantino-esqe comedic or glam violence you witness in American cinema. This movie, for me, really raises a lot of metaphysical discomfort about the nature of our equilibrium with rationality and emotion, intuition and reason, morality and conventions, and who we really are versus who we have become via social construction. Willem Dafoe is in it too which earns it another gold star lol. I found it spellbinding and disturbing, I highly recommend it to folks- it's a love-it-or-hate-it for sure. Another great "philosophy"-oriented director- old school Cronenberg.

I'm just finishing up Putnam's The Threefold Cord, and then I want to find something that will integrate the receptor theory of representation in cognitive neuroscience with embodied cognition- my prof gave me a recommendation but of course the name escapes me. My one prof is also beginning a Foucault reading group this winter so I'm looking forward to that- trying to feed both my continental and analytic sides!

haha thanks for the feedback!!