generativeIR

I got a response this weekend. My POI answered all questions and said other optimistic things. I just decided on a whim and then consulted the forum afterwards. So, I would not hesitate to contact your PsOI. In any case, you've got nothing to lose.

Thanks for the response! I was definitely thinking in modern times. I'm familiar with Kuhn, Chomsky, and Carroll's works that you mentioned (reading Godel, Escher, Bach atm), but also recognize the ability for people outside of philosophy to contribute to philosophy and vice versa in some cases. There is something to be said for ingorance/specialization and the resultant consideration that it is something extraordinary when a physicist contributes to the world of philosophy. I am also aware of those that hold PhD's, but do not work as a "philosopher" or even an academic are considered indepedent scholars. The idea that 9-5 philosophers publish so much (so that the journals are clogged) seems to me a silly idea; it reminds me of Searle and Chomsky's comments on French intellectuals always needing new ideas to keep the spotlight (in the US academic's case, funding) and most of them not being any good. How many interpretations of the categorical imperative do we need before we hit that seemingly elusive margin of diminishing utility/returns? This is a premise that I would like to challenge. First, I'd refer to Schopenhauer's comments on dilettantes studying the arts and sciences as an end in itself and a professional studying the arts and sciences as a means to an end (of money). (1) essentially assumes that people are incapable of reading books and scrutinizing what has been said in the literature. If I collected a dozen renowned scholar's work on Kant in the last 50 years and poured through it and was able to originate, in my free time, an insight not present in their works (or just historiographed their work) then I have subverted (1). (2) I cannot really argue with. It is fairly difficult to find the time to read and write when you must make a living in another vocation. I was more looking for examples similar to David Brooks who is a NYTimes columnist (professional journalist) and has published a few books in sociology, albeit neither are very academic, with just a BA in Sociology (from Chicago I think). He is taken seriously enough that his books end up on undergrad reading lists. Why so harsh on South End and Verso? I have been looking into Bhaskar's transcendental realism recently (philosophy of social science), is there something I don't know? Also, what about Routledge? They seem to have the most interesting new work anyway. I'd read more of it if the books weren't 40-180 bucks a piece (bookfi.org doesn't always cut it).

I know that academics, especially philosophers, don't really respect independent research, but that could simply be because they have the badge (PhD) and independent scholars do not. If someone outside of academia can teach themselves philosophic logic they pretty much just have to be able to read, comprehend, and conceptualize other's philosophical work and with the internet resources are almost endless. This would even, to me, seem to be a true test of mettle since the biggest missing link would be the peer reviewing process. I'm curious if anyone has simply written an essay or series of essays and attempted to have them published by a legitimate (even a private academic) publishing company. Or maybe someone has tried to make it through the double blind to get a submission into an academic journal? Or if someone in the gradspace has knowledge of an independent philosopher or sociologist, etc? I would even be interested to see something from South End or Verso that is written by someone who lacks a proper academic education.

I just on a whim emailed a professor because (he is my main POI and) i noticed that he didn't teach any classes this last year. All i said was "my name is so and so and am planning on applying to the dept this fall. I just had a few questions if you have the time ... I noticed that you did not offer any classes last year ... are going to be teaching 2015/16 or taking any new students? I am curious because one of your grad students noticed i was reading one of your books and gave you a good review. I'm interested in ... and planning on ... thanks for your time, my name" I'll post back here if i get a response, positive or negative. I'm hoping it was polite yet informal, consice, and not requiring too much effort on his part. I also feel like quoting some of Rousseau's First Discourse when navigating these totally necessary etiquette norms.

I should have known that expressing an opinion was the wrong thing to do. What right do I have to exercise my own judgment without first consulting the sentiments of all indiviudals who may hear or read what I say or type? And how could I possibly be a fun person when I have opinions about things? Gah, I must have just not learned anything from women in the 1950s. Oh, the irony of being criticized for taking 'anecdotal evidence' and extending it to an area of judgement by someone who is also taking 'anecdotal evidence' to stretch into the area of judging judgements! And that two points could be conflated by such astute academic minds such as those that can barely define their own field of study. Yeah, I judged that kids work. If what he wrote was representative of his actual hypothesis, then I would bet money on his work being next to useless. As for the discipline, his work is only one example of dozens; just look at the current students and faculty research at all of the universities you are looking at applying. Tell me that some of it is not plainly useless. The whole reason I posted is because several people, in jest I assume, described the field and their explanations of it... All the best!

There is a certain irony in your response. My intended research project is sort of in the same area as his so I am not completely in the dark on the topic which would probably be classified under behavioral economics or marketing strategies (not simply playing RPGs). But, yes based on what I read of his work it would seem to me that the yield from his metrics would likely be low and insignificant. Maybe I am wrong and the guy is a genious and I have no idea what I am talking about. I'll just have to read his edited paper when he's done with it. And my broader point of the post was that comms seems to be a phoenix field and 'new media' is kind of at an experimental research phase so not everything is going to be meticulous.

That is something a first year grad student would say. =P

I'm going to apply to a MA program in Communications this year. Some of the faculty and grad students study things from Jon Stewart to video game design managment, tv (media) production, social media, cognitive science (psychology) as it pertains to visual/auditory stimuli, intellectual property, government communications policy, business strategies for tech firms, economic landscape of tech and media industries, and ethics of information and free speech stuff. I get the feeling that the field is a good mix of humanities, professional studies, and social sciences and as such it allows people to have pretty insignificant research projects. One kid, and I hate criticising people like this but, he is a PhD candidate and studying the economics of video games. 'Okay' I thought, I've considered Steam as a unique behavioral and economic phenomenon. But his focus was on single player RPGs and, having experience there, I could tell that his hypothesis would yield almost no information. You can see flaws in his logic of business behavior in his hypothesis too. So, I thought to myself that 'this kid knows his project is BS (that is to say BasicallyuselesS)...he is milking a fully funded mass comms PhD and doing a BS project because his profs aren't experienced enough with his subject (incentive/rewards in single player RPGs) to criticise him like they should. I don't think older people (most professors, cough) quite "get" the culture of the internet like the people who grew up in it - I consider myself a "native" and i don't even get the culture of the internet. This, I think, is why depts look so chaotic; there just isn't a coherent direction to the study; the more "inter" you get in "interdisciplinary" the more likely you are to suffer diminishing returns. I think that comm depts before the internet were probably useful and had specific things that it examined. The internet was just an explosion of content and different niche markets/cultures popping up and creating their own social signals and jokes and self-observation. A lot of comms projects could probably be better served in anthropolgy and sociology than comms and rhetoric et al. Having said that, I am planning on using the degree as a platform for a poli sci PhD. I'd like to study IP laws and IT innovation in a MA thesis. I am then planning on attempting a PhD in international relations, hopefully studying IP treaties and legal strategies of nation states.

I just decided today that I better apply to some MA programs in the highly likely event that I am rejected by my PhD applications. Anyone planning on applying at Indiana University? ... or does anyone know anything about the history dept there?

Hey all, I'll be applying this winter for PhD programs in political science/international relations. I'm actually excited about getting applications together. I graduated undergrad in May of 2013 and have taken this last year off to work off some of my debt. I have a, possibly dumb, question. How does a dual-major in undergrad weigh into applications. I'm kind of thinking that it barely, if at all, matters since undergrad is basically a party where grade inflation makes sure that the drinks don't stop. I had a pathetically bad start to undergrad and grad school was never on my mind until my senior year (cum gpa is not great, both majors are alright). Most of my overachieving effort went into the papers I wrote. I did a dual major in poltical science and philosophy and want to study IPE, grand strategy, intelligence, and the philosophy of social science (maybe even some cognitive science in there). My goal, ultimately, is publishing as I would love a career studying things that interest me on a personal level. I have several possible research avenues for various topics some with fairly specific questions, but I do not have access to resources required to do any serious personal research. Which reminds me of another question. Are there any people here who have contemplated "independent scholarship"? I decided this last year that the badge of authority is probably a necessity. I'm not tied to being a university professor for a career either (not tall enough), I'd be happy consulting, NGOing, or think tanking. So far, I have begun drafting SOPs and LoR emails (kind of nervous about those as it has been a year since I have graduated) and will be scheduling for GRE in mid-July; Ohio State, Berkeley, IU, CUNY, and NYU comprise my list at the moment.

Hi, everybody! First post, was curious if anyone out there has any experience in studying intelligence or grand strategy in international relations (at a US school). I am curious because in my own findings intelligence studies seems to be within the field of criminal justice and grand strategy in IR/political science. Also, when i say intelligence I mean things beyond diplomacy, but not quite war.