Chrysippus'Doge

This is just a misunderstanding of the meaning of analytic: There is nothing in the definition of suffering that says people can't condone it. What about sadists? What about the suffering of people like Hitler or Pol Pot? There are myriad examples of times when someone may condone suffering. But for example there are, BY DEFINITION, no married bachelors. That's why "no one condones sufferings" is not analytic and "all bachelors are unmarried" is. And I gotta say Schwarz, although I'm really sympathetic to your desire to justify the study philosophy, I think in the course of your argument you've ended up parodying the very discipline you were trying to defend! Because isn't that one of the issues that the detractors of philosophy (and many philosophers too!) often highlight? That no amount of linguistic or conceptual analysis will ever be able to answer empirical questions? And the questions in this thread at the moment are pretty much empirical: How much suffering is there? How many people are capable of alleviating this suffering and to what degree? So questions about analyticity are pretty much irrelevant. Perhaps I'm missing some subtlety, in which case feel free to correct me!

I... I got an offer from Oxford too. I simply cannot believe it. I'M NOT SHUT OUT ANYMORE WHOOOOO I'm still worried they're going to e-mail me and tell me it was a mistake.

Who did you e-mail? Did they give you anymore details?

<vent> Fuck Fuck Fuck Fuck I'm probably gonna get shut out then everyone I told I was applying to grad school will know I failed and everyone who told me it was a waste of time will feel vindicated and my dreams will be crushed and damn I just KNOW I would do well if I got in somewhere but so will everyone else and I've been working so hard for this for years but so has everyone else and now it's all for nothing but it's not for nothing for everyone else damn damn !! oh Jesus, Joseph, Mary, and St. Jude, what am I going to do? <Coldplay> Nobody said it was easy No one ever said it would be this hard </Coldplay> </Vent>

Right right, that makes sense. Thanks for the info!

Oh nice congrats! It looks like their acceptances can be pretty spread out so maybe you were just the first! Was the e-mail generic or personal?

Not a peep. Just that one weird post last Sunday night which I'm honestly a little skeptical of.

Forgot that today was Friday, accidentally ate meat at dinner. Accordingly, there was an e-mail from Notre Dame waiting for me at home telling me I was a bad Catholic, God was displeased, and so I couldn't be in their program. Ah well. Come on UConn.

Hard to say... in 2014 looks like about 10 posted during the first round of acceptances (and some posted the second day if that means anything), in 2015 I only see 2. I don't think it's unreasonable to hold out hope for another day though.

Congrats UConn! Share details please, don't leave us in the dark!

Got the official rejection from Carnegie Mellon. Cordial e-mail from Zollman. Disappointing, I was hopeful about that one.

So I'll try my hand here, though it's been a wee bit since I've looked at counterfactual semantics. I think S is being used to represent a particular sphere around the index i... Which is just all those indexes which fall within a given "distance" from i. So I don't think it's a function or a generic formulae but rather a set of indices, which would explain why we see it used like 'Ǝj ∈ S'. This just says: "There exists an index in S s.t." yada yada yada. Which answers the second question: I think j,k, etc. are just additional variables for indices. Thus j makes true or false propositions represented by variable A,B etc., which is abbreviated to j ╞ A, j ╡B respectively. So I guess then as far as #3 is concerned, did you mean why must A be made false at k for A □→ B to hold? Or am I missing the point...

This is really inspirational. I wish you nothing but success this application season, sounds like you absolutely earned it. (Also, don't worry about those idiots in your math commons. They sound more like first year engineering students than mathematicians).

"Expected. 2 pubs in geology, pre-calc tutor" Probably applied to Yale's prestigious joint Ph.D program in Philosophy, Geology, and High School Math

/r/askphilosophy is probably the best place as far as discussion goes, but the fact that all posts have to be questions can at times be limiting. /r/philosophy is pretty hit or miss. Some of the posts are nonsense, but there is quality content there. It's kind of up to you to separate the wheat from the chaff. It's true the discussion can be pretty bad because the posts get inundated with people who know nothing about philosophy, but the Weekly Discussion series that were running are actually high quality and oftentimes experts will join in the discussion. /r/academicphilosophy is more focused on the profession and is pretty dead.