thatsjustsemantics

Hi, I thought I would introduce myself as well! I'll probably make a signature once this forum gets busier. 1. B.A. in Philosophy (GPA 3.8x/P-GPA 3.8x) 2. AOI: time, metametaphysics, language, feminism 3. I'll be applying to fifteen schools, all PhD programs! Of course, three of them are "lower ranked"according to the PGR but excellent fits for my AOI; If I get shut out, I'll take it as a good sign and pack my bags elsewhere.

Adding to this: 96% Verbal, 46% Quant, 93% writing here. I'm not worried at all. Some schools might have a cut-off, but I'm confident that such a cut-off also considers Cumulative GPA and GPA in one's major(s). Moreover, to put this into philosophical perspective: if an admissions committee composed of professors who will shape your potential career is superficial enough to be more than implicitly biased against an applicant solely based on their GRE scores, then that is a university you probably do not want to attend. Too bad we can't get refunds.

I have a few questions: I have a great research interest in modality (counterfactuals, "might," "ought," etc). I also have broad interests in noncognitivism, deflationary theories of truth, specific Platonic dialogues, and lastly (and least of all) French philosophy and intellectual thought. Do you know any professors whose current and sustained research interests overlap with my research interests? I most definitely want to apply to a program in which some professors are really interested in modality at the least, but it's hard finding out which departments will continue to offer courses in modality by the time I apply to them (2015-2016 applicant). What's the climate like at UT-Austin? Any general advice for applicants to this specific program? -- or, in other words, do you know what the admissions committee valued most out of your application, especially since their admission contrasted the fact that you were almost shut-out? Thank you for any and all guidance!

The moral realist, in general, endorses the claim that there are facts of the matter as to whether or not some actions are moral or immoral, and that these facts are objective. The moral antirealist agrees that there may be facts of the matter as to whether or not some actions are moral or immoral, but they reject that these facts are objective or bivalent (either true or false). What do we mean by the word "objective"? See below. The better-worded moral anti-realist would say that there are various moral interpretations that emerge from biological/psychological/sociological facts; and not that these interpretations are the facts. This emergence is contrary to objectivity because it is contingent upon factors that are non-moral. Moreover, it is important to notice that this emergence is also the fact of the matter as to why some particular individual might play the moral language game when they say that a particular thing is right or wrong.

This is an excellent survey, thank you. Do you have a post somewhere in regards to how to read these funding packages, however? I notice a great disparity between places like University of Arizona and Stanford University when it comes to funding packages, but I know the latter's location is extremely expensive, so I'm not sure how to weigh whether one school's funding packages are much better than anothers. For instance, John Hopkins is listed as offering somewhere around 28.5K/yr, but is that because the school's funding package is so generous or because the cost of living is high? If there were some way to assign a value to a funding package, that would be extremely helpful.

Yeah, this sounds fantastic. I know O'Keefe works on Hellenistic stuff, but is there anyone else I'm not picking up on? I didn't know about the Emory thing; I think that sounds fantastic.

I feel like a lot of people are picking up on some interesting questions, but not the right one. In the absence of Attic Greek or Latin courses in my transcript, how much signifiance will the statement "I studied Greek/Latin by myself for x amount of time" in my personal statement be? There is little evidence that I did intensive work, and how are they to know that I am not lying? They might be charitable in that respect, but in order to set me apart from candidates who don't state that they know either Greek or Latin, I'd have to give some kind of measurable evidence. Petros picks this up when he/she writes "adcoms want to see graded work" etc. As for a classics post-bac, Petros, do you know of any classics programs with strong faculty in Plato, Aristotle, and Hellenistic philosophy especially? There are very few ancient philosophy MA programs, with only Western Ontario U. coming to mind.

Hello everyone, I appreciate all the responses. I believe that aiming to learn both Attic Greek and Latin would not be a good use of my time during my gap year. I would prefer to be updated in some of the literature in Hellenistic philosophy instead. As ianfaircloud confirms, I am worried that my area of interest in Greek and Latin philosophy will lack some significance in comparison to other applicants who have devoted an impressive amount of time toward learning the language and the literature during their studies. In any case, I will list it as an area of interest and try my best to come off as sincere in that respect. It is assuring that many students who do come to specialize in classical philosophy did not always have a wealth of experience in classical languages in the first place.

Hello everyone, I tried searching for an answer to this question, but I had little luck. If anyone's aware of a thread on this topic, let me know. Otherwise, here is the context leading up to the question: I am interested in Classical Philosophy, but my college cancelled its classics program (and thus its Greek language courses) a few years prior to my matriculation there. My writing sample involves classical philosophy (Plato's Meno and the Socratic Fallacy), but I don't have any noticeable proficiency in either Greek or Latin. Should I not bother applying for special programs in Ancient Philosophy because I lack a working knowledge of these two languages, and how can I sincerely talk about my interest in classical philosophy when I know no more than the Greek alphabet or a few words in Latin? I am professionally proficient in French, so I am not too worried about satisfying some modern language requirements as well.

NathanKellen, Thank you for your insightful response. I looked at the program, and the strength of your department is clear. However, I shy away from logic and philosophical logic -- not out of disrespect, but because I am interested mainly in material inferences in philosophy, and not formal inferences. Moreover, I am not confident in my logic. I took a symbolic logic course and an independent study in non-standard logics (modal, temporal, fuzzy), and the latter left me quite bewildered at times. In other words, I don't think I would be ready for a good logic program. Ultimately, I think I would enjoy studying under Dorit Bar-On, upon initial review, and Lycan, but I'm worried that I wouldn't be able to make excellent use of a fantastic logic program, and even if I were to try, I don't think it would take me very far; do these anxieties make sense?

Hello, I'm an undergraduate at a small, liberal arts college. I have three years of experience as an undergraduate teaching assistant. GPA: 3.8x, and I am registered to take the GRE in May. I have given one presentation at an undergraduate conference in San Diego, and I have given a talk at a graduate student conference at the Uni. of KY. My writing sample is on a modern semantic paradox, which I compare and contrast to resembling paradoxes in some of Plato's dialogues, and then I offer a direction towards thinking about this paradox that doesn't "solve" them, but at least makes them less problematic (hint: I will bring in R. Brandom's Inferentialism). This would signal my desired AOI's in the philosophy of language, the history of philosophy (esp. compare and contrast between ancient and modern philosophy), and paradoxes in general. Elsewhere, I also want to write about counterfactuals and meta-ethics -- which I think is really tied into the phil. of language. Given these interests, and given that my gpa makes me at least "creditable" as a candidate, should I apply to PhD programs, or should I only apply to MA programs? There are only three schools which I believe (feel free to contradict that) would be a good fit for me given my interests, which are UT@Austin, Princeton, and UNC; but my chances at these schools are discouraging. Where else would I look into given my interests, especially MA programs with: (1) some strong faculty in my AOI, and (2) funding that won't lead me to consider prostitution (Tufts is out). I've been lurking around for a little bit, and I think that a lot of people here give wise comments. I'm clueless, and my faculty is small (3 professors) who have been out of the scene for a while, but they come from strong departments back in the 70s/80s/90s. edit: I should mention that I am an "under-represented" candidate (hint: Middle-Eastern ethnicity), and have attended Rutgers' Institute for Diversity in Phil. I have a modest connection to one of the professors there, although that professor is outside my AOI; will be considering applying there as well. edit#2: I also think UPitts, UMich, and other schools strong in Phil of L and Ancient would be good for me; but these are Leiter Celebrated schools, what schools that are great but I don't know about should I look into?